Golf Magazine's Top 100

« **Reply #50 on:** August 07, 2003, 03:34:00 PM »

Well Kingsbarns is on its way down which it should, it does not in my opinion belong in the top 100, not in the UK where courses like Rye, Royal Cinque Ports, St. Enodoc, Saunton and Burnham are superior. Still sad that a course like Swinley still does not make it. I like the wild and woolly European Club and although I think some of the above courses are superior to it, find it an acceptable addition (In my humble opinion).

« **Reply #51 on:** August 07, 2003, 03:40:20 PM »

On its way down, but still hanging tough at 65.

I hate it when evidence shows how "right" I am.

Long live Kingsbarns!

TH

ps - I am just kidding and massively shit-giving in every post on this thread.

« **Reply #52 on:** August 07, 2003, 03:47:03 PM »

I feel Kingsbarns belongs near the bottom of a good UK top 25 or 50 list but not a world list. I do not think the Europeon Club belongs in a worlds best discussion much less on a list. Pacific and Bandon are finally getting some correct separation and finding their way to their proper locations. I find it hard to believe anyone seriously feels Torrey South is a top 100. One could argue that it is barely the best course on the site and certainly not the best in San Diego. Of course i would think San Francisco GC would go up and not down after improvements were done and trees were taken out.

« **Reply #53 on:** August 07, 2003, 03:57:36 PM »

Tiger,

I found the European Club blessed to have a natural environment that enabled the course to be very interesting. It did not have the manufactured aesthetic that Kingbarns had (I realized they had to move earth etc). That being said I found the really cool holes at the E-club (#3, #8, #12, #15 and #17) were inspiring while I can't say I was truly moved at Kingsbarns. I'd rank the others Rye, Deal, Saunton superior to the E-Club but considering the raters don't seem to take the time to go there and check em out I don't mind so much the E Club's addition. Pat Ruddy is big into promotion and it is obvious this has had an effect with their ratings. Again, I don't think the course is top 100 in the world but I didnt mind it as representative of all the links courses that should be on the list but aren't for reasons mostly a circumstance of promotion. I think I just contradicted myself but you get the gist.

I think Golf's most beloved character and father of this site is a fan of the course as well and probably voted it on but I cannot say for sure.

I've played I think almost 40 of the Golf World Top 100 in Britain and K-Barns is almost at the end of that list and not the #12 or #13 it was in their last rating.. I'll take TNC (The New Course) next time I'm in town at the Auld Sod.

« **Reply #54 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:05:14 PM »

Chivas -

Rye sounds amazing. Thanks for articulating. I have yet to experience Sand Hills, NGLA or CPC but I know each would be unforgettable and magical. Never heard Rye compared in that way but I'm a sucker for places where the golfing gods take permanent residence (see Nate's favorite stomping grounds like Merion, Shinnecock and perhaps Newport). Sounds like Rye is one of those places.

« **Reply #55 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:09:26 PM »

NAF:

Hmmmm... as I stated on a previous thread, the New Course at St. Andrews left me cold, and this was my second go-round on it. I thought 8 and 9 were both great holes, but beyond that, while it was a difficult, fair test, it just paled compared not only to its neighbor TOC but also to every other course I've played in Scotland... That being said, it's not a BAD course, and there is some validity that it just suffers due to proximity to TOC and thus expectations of it v. that gem.... I'd still have a hard time ranking it over any of the others we've discussed.

Bottom line is this: if and when I go back (and that likely won't be for a LONG time), I don't seek out the New. If I'm again forced to play another course at SA, it will be Eden or Jubilee.

Re Kingsbarns, we've covered it all already, no need to re-hash, agree to disagree, it's just me being an asshole throwing this ranking in your face.

TH

« **Reply #56 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:10:49 PM »

Rye is a a much different experience during the summer than the winter.. Even without the current dry heatwave, Rye is burnt to a crisp during the summer to the point of almost or really losing their fairways. One cannot control the ball at all so it does in a way hamper the experience. Or paradoxically make it sporty. That being said playing Rye in the fall, winter or early spring is quite spectacular. I played the course for the first time in the summer when it was yellow and stupidly posted a thread here asking if Doak's rating of 9 was correct, I didnt see it. 2 subsequent trips to Rye make me feel a bit stupid because it is spectacular. Note: those trips were during the spring when the course had a modicum of green to go with its wonderful burnt tawny colours.

« **Reply #57 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:18:12 PM »

I forgot, for the Aussie Mavens I would hope perhaps Bob Harrison's the National Moonah makes it. I was really impressed by it.

« **Reply #58 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:21:43 PM »

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on August 07, 2003, 11:39:36 AM

"Rustic Canyon isn't on it."

Assuming TKC also isn't, will those who berated me for GD's list please step forward and give GM the HUGE ration of shit it now deserves?

I am just appalled at these ommissions.

Maybe I am misremembering, but wasn't most of the conversation regarding Rustic regarding (a) Why Rustic did not make Golf Digest's Public Course Top 100; and (b) Not so much the rankings, but yours and others specific critiques of the course.

As to the former, this GM's list is Best in America (public and private) is it not? I havent played enough of these to have an opinion on whether Rustic should be on the list, but GM's list looks a little more formidable to crack than GD's top public, don't you think?

As to the latter, well . . . you dont want to talk about for fear of Tommy's wrath.

« **Reply #59 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:22:26 PM »

Aussie Courses on World Top Hundo

Royal Melbourne (

Kingston Heath (21)
New South Wales (43)
Royal Adelaide (50)

« **Reply #60 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:29:49 PM »

Mike Vegis -

Forgot to mention the icing on the cake for you...the GOLF MAGAZINE Top 100 U.S. ranking is laid on top of a beautiful spread photograph of one of TOC's holes (forgive me for not recognizing exactly which one) backdropped by the Atlantic. The only other photos in the feature are of Pine Valley, Cypress Point, Muirfield, Spyglass, Royal Dornoch and Torrey Pines.

GN

« **Reply #61 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:32:55 PM »

Commonwealth is a notable exception from the Aussie courses.. Still seems that Australasia is underrepresented but perhaps when Doak is finished there will be another 2 or 3 courses on there. Still think the National belongs on there.

Is there too much of a U.S. bias on the Golf List? It is funny in that the thread that generated from Tom MacWood's posting of the top 100 in the world's finest courses seemed to have a much more intl flavour but I need to go relook at it.

« **Reply #62 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:40:11 PM »

Quote from: Scratch_Nathan on August 07, 2003, 04:29:49 PM

Mike Vegis -

Forgot to mention the icing on the cake for you...the GOLF MAGAZINE Top 100 U.S. ranking is laid on top of a beautiful spread photograph of one of TOC's holes (forgive me for not recognizing exactly which one) backdropped by the Atlantic. The only other photos in the feature are of Pine Valley, Cypress Point, Muirfield, Spyglass, Royal Dornoch and Torrey Pines.

GN

Oh, yea... LIFE IS GOOD! I love the icing on the cake!

« **Reply #63 on:** August 07, 2003, 04:45:20 PM »

While of course no one will agree completely with any top 100 list..... I feel that Golf Magazine has done a much better job of placing quite a few of our favorites.......

for example.....
Sand Hills #7, this is a justified ranking as opposed to Golf Digest's ranking of #38

Pacific Dunes #11, a very high ranking but much more accurate than GD's #47

Oak Hill East #26, this course was vastly overrated in Golf Digest's ranking at #10, Fazio's changes drastically hurt the layout.

It was interesting reading a few comments on Hidden Creek posted earlier and the perceived infatuation with Coore & Crenshaw courses. This argument really doesn't hold much merit as the only other C&C course on the list is Sand Hills, and no one will argue that it doesn't belong. There actually could be an argument that other C&C courses could make the list, what about Cuscowilla, Kapalua, or Chechessee Creek?

Why does everyone think that Hidden Creek would make the list over these courses? Could it be that it is vastly different in design, look and style than almost every other course on the list?

« **Reply #64 on:** August 07, 2003, 05:06:35 PM »

JimmyVA

You make a good point but remember this US list includes all courses not just modern courses.

Is Hidden Creek comparable to

Salem
Valley Club
Pasatiempo
Fenway
Essex
Aronimink
Kitansett
Huntingdon Valley (there's another good omission)
Philadelphia CC
Wykagyl
St. Louis CC
probably other classic courses I've forgotten about?

That's pretty steep company to keep and I just question if they had more then two votes from enthusiastic GCA types.

« **Reply #65 on:** August 07, 2003, 05:11:59 PM »

I wonder what Kobe Bryant's top 100 courses are.

Oops. Forgot the row of sarcasmileys!

« **Reply #66 on:** August 07, 2003, 05:17:15 PM »

Mike Sweeney- just saw that post

NO - Roger Rulewich is not the most underappreciated architect in the world. As far as Yale goes just look at its place in the world in 1939 in that wonderful article Tom MacWood uncovered in the in my opinion section and you can see what the possibilities are. That's where it should fit at somewhere around the top 30-40 in the world at top 20 in the US. When the Yale restoration leads to that recognition then I'll be the first to say it's a success. I've seen the newest work up at Yale on #16 and the redan. I still consider his work on the front 9 a complete butcher job and his attempted "complete restoration" following that to be a pathetic halfhearted attempt to reflect criticism while still ignoring the bold Raynor style.

Mike you saw the little pamphlet mailed to the members recently when they once again spelled the name of the architect McDonald twice no less! If they can't spell MacDonald correctly how can they restore a golf course.

« **Reply #67 on:** August 07, 2003, 05:17:34 PM »

Sandwich at 32

Shivas

I think Rye used to make the GOLF world list.

« **Reply #68 on:** August 07, 2003, 05:20:31 PM »

David M.:

You sure aren't giving me any free passes lately, are you? Please do understand that nothing I say here is meant to hold up in court - ESPECIALLY when it comes to giving crap to friends.

In any case, you have to understand that when it comes to slinging shit, logic has no place in the equation.

That being said, GD's list did get a massive amount of crap for the ommission of Rustic Canyon, even though GD did also laud it as the single best new affordable course of the year.

I don't give a rat's ass which list is easier to crack, GM never gave Rustic a moment's mention in ANY list, and thus logic be damned, they deserve the same ration of shit.

Remember this is all in good fun.

As for critiques of that wonderful course, I deny ever making such. And if I did, it's not Tommy's wrath alone I would have feared, but also that of the co-architect and a certain persuasive LA lawyer who will go un-named, all of whom are great guys, but all of whom sure do know how to be wrathful when they feel they are "wronged."

TH

« **Reply #69 on:** August 07, 2003, 06:57:03 PM »

Tom, give shit . . . get shit, that is my attitude.

But honestly I wouldnt know what to give crap about when it comes to the GM list. I can find a bunch of courses on GD public list that don't hold a candle to Rustic. Either from my inexperience our the list's quality, i cant do the same with the GM list.

I was never "wronged" regarding Rustic Canyon and never felt that way. But I am just "right" about it.

« **Reply #70 on:** August 07, 2003, 07:16:57 PM »

Noel, I'm appalled that you think The European Club was better than Kingsbarns...but to each his own, I guess.

Cheers,
Darren

« **Reply #71 on:** August 07, 2003, 08:58:29 PM »

I notice that the great Shinnecock Hills keeps slowly, but surely, edging towards the very top of the list. (I believe it was #7 on the previous world list) Maybe when the ratings come out post 2004 Open it will be tapping PV on the shoulder.

« **Reply #72 on:** August 07, 2003, 09:06:14 PM »

Tom,

I have a whole post all typed up ready so you can face my supposed "wrath." But honestly it's just is plain tiring and isn't really any fun. Just exactly the way you REALLY feel about Rustic Canyon. But hark!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! On my way out of San Jose last Friday, what was that magnificent looking golf hole that looked to be placed on a ski jump of a hill? It couldn't have been something from Cinnabar Hills could it?
And YES, it looked to be a course of clearly superior intellect off of the tee. Much better then that wacky #2 at Rustic Canyon.

That should get him going good don't you think David?

« **Reply #73 on:** August 07, 2003, 09:18:12 PM »

Tommy,

Come on back to Merion!

Willie

« **Reply #74 on:** August 07, 2003, 09:36:57 PM »

I was worried that the GM raters would be swayed by the glitz of Doonbeg. It has so many architectural issues I am pleased it did not make the top 100 world list.

JC

News:

NAF

THuckaby2

Tiger_Bernhardt

NAF

Scratch_Nathan

THuckaby2

NAF

NAF

DMoriarty

Scratch_Nathan

Scratch_Nathan

NAF

Mike Vegis @ Kiawah

Jimmy Muratt

GeoffreyC

Dan Kelly

GeoffreyC

Paul_Turner

THuckaby2

DMoriarty

Darren_Kilfara

Gary_Smith

Tommy_Naccarato

Willie_Dow

Jonathan Cummings

An Error Has Occurred!