[redanman]

Once again, I think Tom Doak would be very reticent to give himself a 10.  Just guessing.  He did a wonderful job with PD, but it's not a Daok 10 as far as I can tell.

However, I have not seen his out of North America work.

Also, I am extremely excited to see SFGC get those holes back.

[David Kelly]

BTW, I just checked Golfweek's ratings.  They put Pacific Dunes above all the U.S. courses rated 9, except ANGC.  They also put it above all the Doak 10's except Pine Valley and CPC, and in a tie with Shinnie.  Overall, Golfweek ranks Pacific Dunes tied for 5th in the U.S., one one-hundredth of a point behind ANGC.  Only PVGC, CPC, ANGC and Sand Hills are rated higher.  

Jim,

Golfweek's ratings for Modern and Classic are not meant to be combined so you can't take the rating a modern course gets and plug it into the Classic list to see where it would fall overall.   Modern coursess are rated and ranked against other modern courses only and the same goes for the classic courses.

In other words the two lists are separate entities and are not supposed to be combined to achieve a Top 200 list.

[Voytek Wilczak]

9s

SFGC - equal (tall statement there!)
TH

What happens when the restoration is completed?

Did they find it??? Damaged?

The Scream, I mean.

[peter_p]

Black Forest is a five, with better conditioning than what I saw, a six. IMO, Doak was under a lot of self imposed pressure when he was making Pacific Dunes, didn't want to screw up the great site. I'd give it a 10, I don't downgrade the green-tee transitions.

[Jim Nugent]

Jim,

Golfweek's ratings for Modern and Classic are not meant to be combined so you can't take the rating a modern course gets and plug it into the Classic list to see where it would fall overall.   Modern coursess are rated and ranked against other modern courses only and the same goes for the classic courses.

In other words the two lists are separate entities and are not supposed to be combined to achieve a Top 200 list.

David, so I can't compare the point totals on the two lists?  9.23 on the moderns is a different scale than 9.23 on the classics?  My mistake, then.  

[Ville Nurmi]

Voytek,
I think the Scream is still missing. But the guys who did it were just convicted in Oslo. They have not revealed where the paintings are.

Ville

[Dan Herrmann]

Someday I'd love to see how "Doak" ratings relate to Golf Digest's star ratings.

Methinks they're probably worlds apart.

[redanman]

 9.23 on the moderns is a different scale than 9.23 on the classics?  

Each is a relative scale for a fixed set of courses.  A relative logarithmic if you please.  Non-intersecting circles on a venn diagram. (I promise not to post a picture)

Doak numbers compared to GD ***** system is easy.  Anything with good conditioning, service and over a Doak 5 is **** or more.  Architects in NJ for example is ****1/2 last I checked the billboard near exit 44.

And yes, indeed, The Scream is still missing, but available for linking to indicate the feelings of the very sooul of golf.

[Jordan Wall]

What does Kapalua rate??

It is a course everyone should try and play.  The only thing is, you have[/color] to travel a ways to get there...

[Tom Huckaby]

Jordan - yeah, kinda hard to rate Kapalua Plantation using the Doak scale, given how that relates so closely to travel issues...

But if we can move beyond that, I'd call it an 8.  I can't get it to 9, given the definition there.  Is it really one of the best in the world with no weaknesses?  As beautiful as it is, as fun as it is, as great as it is, well... I think the glaring weakness is the cartball nature - dictated by the site, yes, but present nonetheless.  If we're allowed to cheat and use decimals, I'd get it to 8.5 though.  It's almost a 9 as I see it...

And you have to undersand also, anything over 7 is really, really good.  It's sure no knock on K-P to call it an 8....

[redanman]

What does Kapalua rate??

pssssst.... Jordan ..... that's a C & C course .... this is a Doak thread

[Jordan Wall]

*whispering*

oops I forgot...

Ummm, I thought Kapalua was Doak.  Ummm, mistake...

*sigh*

 

Tom,

I know an 8 is very, very good.  I was just wondering as all.  I can tell you that if ANGC gets a 9 then certainly an 8 cannot be that bad!!



btw, why does ANGC only have a 9 anyways?

[Tom Huckaby]

Aw hell, leaving it at Doak courses only is sure no fun. That's why I went with it...

 

And Jordan, Augusta is a 9 as evaluated by Tom Doak.  I suppose given it's bastardization over the years, that makes a certain sense.  But it's the most solid 10 there is the way I look at things... That is, the one course that if I got the invite I'd drop everything and fly NOW, and my wife and kids would understand.  If there is a Huckaby Scale, that's how 10 would be defined.

TH

[Jim Nugent]

 9.23 on the moderns is a different scale than 9.23 on the classics?  

Each is a relative scale for a fixed set of courses.  A relative logarithmic if you please.  Non-intersecting circles on a venn diagram. (I promise not to post a picture)

I'm afraid that does not clear things up for me.  

[George Pazin]

Jim, here's my non-Golfweek rater's understanding: a "Golfweek 10" is a top 10 course, a 9 is a top 25, an 8 is a top 50, a 7 is a top 100, a 6 is a top 250, and so on (hope my memory is okay on those numbers, I think I'm at least close). So, by Bill saying it's logarithmic, he means each drop in one digit, means a bigger field of courses in its category.

As for why the lists don't mesh, you are only comparing the courses to their time-peers; in clearer terms, you might feel a course is top 10 for modern courses, but only top 50 when compared to the Pine Valleys and Oakmonts of the world.

Hope that helps.

[Jim Nugent]

George, think I understand now, thanks.  If I get it right, the raters can only give whole number rankings, which are based on where the course stands compared to the others in its class.  

That leads to some interesting conclusions.  Pine Valley, e.g., gets a rating of 9.46.  That means lots of the raters do not consider it to be among the top ten classic courses in the U.S.  I'm guessing none of them think it is outside the top 25.  If so, more than half of them do not put it in the top 10.  Does that seem as amazing to you as it does to me?  Which ten classic courses do those raters think are better?  

Only one course apparently is rated in the top ten U.S. classics by more than half the raters: CPC.  Merion has ranking under nine.  That means it isn't even in the top 25, at least on one rater's card and perhaps more.  At least one rater didn't put Riviera in the top 50.

I doubt half the people on this DG would rank Pine Valley outside the top ten classic courses.  Is there really that wide a difference in opinion among people who know golf courses well?  Or are some of the raters a bit under-qualified?  

[Jordan Wall]

I dont know about you guys.

But I like Huckabee's scale a lot (sorry Tom)

10....im leaving now honey

9...honey, were taking a special trip

8...kids, you wanna go on vacation

7...honey, business meeting tomorrow

6...I am working late tonight hun

5...I am taking the kids out honey
(leave kids sleeping)

4...i have a day off honey

3...buddy day

2...i am sick boss

1...wife, you wanna play golf

[Tom Huckaby]

Ha!  Love it.  But you gotta call that the Wall Scale.. all I did was give my version of what a 10 is.

Wall/Huckaby works also.

Funny but that is how these things work for me... I'd bet shivas/Paul Thomas/lots of other guys follow this scale also.

 

[Jordan Wall]

The Wallaby scale.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

The Wallaby scale.

 

PERFECT!

Well done.

 

[Tim Pitner]

I thought a bit more about this yesterday and wondered--how would people rank Pacific Dunes if it were located in Scotland or Ireland?  My guess is that they would rate it as one of the handful of best courses in the world.  People might regard it as better than Ballybunion and/or Dornoch.  It's hard to put aside factors such as atmosphere and environment when evaluating courses, but, to me, this exercise shows that Pacific Dunes might very well be a 10.  It doesn't have any weak holes.  

[ed_getka]

Tim,
   I am curious why you think PD would rate as one of the handful of best courses in the world if it were in Ireland or Scotland? How would that change how it is viewed?

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim:

I'd agree most definitely that atmosphere and environment do matter... I don't think one SHOULD put these factors aside when evaluating courses...

I just don't see any way that such at Bandon is inferior to such at any place in Scotland or Ireland.

Pacific Dunes is what it is:  a truly great golf course.  I just still don't think one can get it to 10, not when all those others are nines.

But you're right - it doesn't have a weak hole.  Then again I'd say that for quite a few others on the nine list.

TH

[Tim Pitner]

Ed, I think there is a tendency to give older, historic courses the benefit of the doubt in these ratings, even in the ratings of someone like Tom Doak who has/had a reputation as an iconoclast.  So, I wonder whether some of the courses people rate as 9s and 10s would be rated that highly if they were relatively new courses like Pacific Dunes.  I guess I thought about Scotland and Ireland because Pacific Dunes plays like a links course, and it's reputation might even be greater if it were located where links golf is traditionally played.

Tom, I don't disagree that Bandon has an environment the equal of Scotland/Ireland, but it doesn't have the history, which I think gets factored into these ratings as well.  I'm not going to quibble about whether Pacific Dunes is a 9 or a 10--I was just saying it's not crazy talk to call it a 10.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Tim:

Well, I'm on record here as saying history matters also - why shouldn't it?  Sure that makes it tough for Tom Doak and other modern architects, but they'll live.  

In any case, I'd agree it is FAR from crazy talk to call PD a 10 - anyone who did would get not much argument from me, other than to ask how they evaluate all those other nines.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()