News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #75 on: March 02, 2005, 09:51:24 AM »
Tom, you way over-estimate the presence and participation rates of GW raters on this website. And if there are more hopefuls, they haven't registered their intent with us, which is fine with me.

Brad:

Maybe I do, maybe I don't.  Just remember I'm talking about the folks who participate a LOT on here.... out of that number, I feel pretty confident in my estimates.

BTW, as long as you're looking in, can you go re-educate your man shivas about the correct and incorrect usage of your rankings?  The man seems to think it's OK to use the final numbers to compile one big list combining Classical and Modern.  Last time we tried to do this you yourself said that really wasn't a proper use of the data.  So set the man straight, will ya?

Or set ME straight if that's the case.  See, I'd love it if we could do this, so I could stop thinking all my GW rater friends are spineless wusses who can't compare Sand Hills to Cypress.

 ;D ;D

TH

ps - please do understand also all of my comments on all of this are all in good fun, really good-natured crap-giving to my many friends on your panel.

THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #76 on: March 02, 2005, 10:23:10 AM »
shivas:

Keep trying.

That makes perfect sense to me.

It's your leader who said the data was compiled differently and thus the comparisons shouldn't be made.  Note the data wasn't disclosed in the magazine, but it was published in here (ie 9.6 for Sand Hills, 9.4 for Cypress, etc. - one poster took it all and made a compilation list).

Brad seems to be in the house.  I stand ready for logic to prevail and for you to be restored to manhood.  But until then, there's really not much you can say.

 ;D

TH

THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #77 on: March 02, 2005, 10:33:36 AM »
shivas:

You seem to want so badly for this to make logical sense to you... and perhaps you have figured it out.  I don't remember what Brad said, please.  I don't live by his words like you guys.   ;)  Knowing his propensity for paucity of words in here though, I doubt he went to any greater lenghts than just a simple "the data isn't equivalent so don't use it that way."  That's my recollection anyway.  If what he meant by that is your explanation, then great.  I'm glad it makes you see things more clearly.

Bottom line is it still allows me to give you, and all my other GW rater friends, crap for not being able to compare Sand Hills to Cypress.

So I think we all come out of this happy.  I do so love win-wins.

 ;D ;D ;D

Michael Wharton-Palmer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #78 on: March 02, 2005, 10:44:11 AM »
Great analogy Shivas..and by the way..I will go with the cruz/hayak 10's myself..they become the traditional 10's

THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #79 on: March 02, 2005, 10:46:02 AM »
shivas:

This has always made sense to me.  Every single rationalization and explanation you have used in this thread has made perfect sense to me.  That's not the issue.  I believe you man, and agree with you.

You just remain a Carson-like wuss for not being able to compare Sand Hills to Cypress.

 ;D ;D ;D

Doug Sobieski

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #80 on: March 02, 2005, 10:55:02 AM »
Shivas:

Did you happen to see what Salma Hayek was wearing at the Oscars?!?!?!? My wife asked me a question about her hair or Penelope Cruz or something while they were presenting, and I honestly hadn't seen anything but her cleavage for about 90 seconds. My wife agreed that Salma is a good addition to my top five list of exemptions.

Regards,

Sobe

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #81 on: March 02, 2005, 10:58:21 AM »
Let's just say that when those two showed up on the stage at the Oscars, my wife was watching me verrrry closely! ;D


Shivas,
Did you catch Chris Rock's intro for them?
"...nobody will be able to take their eyes of these next four presenters..." Perfect! 8)


About that Top 200 list idea, would it be fair to assume there would be an even split between classic and modern course? If not, which would have the edge, and by how much?

JohnV

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #82 on: March 02, 2005, 10:58:51 AM »
Shivas:

Did you happen to see what Salma Hayek was wearing at the Oscars?!?!?!? My wife asked me a question about her hair or Penelope Cruz or something while they were presenting, and I honestly hadn't seen anything but her cleavage for about 90 seconds. My wife agreed that Salma is a good addition to my top five list of exemptions.

Regards,

Sobe



My ex would grant me exemptions like that also, knowing full well
that there was snowballs chance that I'd ever get to put in in play. ;)

Oops, that picture was from 2000, but I think you all get the points.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 11:00:17 AM by John Vander Borght »

Doug Sobieski

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #83 on: March 02, 2005, 11:08:21 AM »
John:

Thanks for brightening my snowy day!!

When I lived in Orlando I convinced my wife to let me put a local news anchor on my list, since I might actually run into her. A couple weeks later I found myself standing in the beer line next to her at a Magic game. Only then did my wife tell me that I'm not really allowed to exercise an exemption  ::)

My wife and I actually have our lists written on a note card that we've had for 10 years or so!!! We update it once a year.

Regards,

Sobe

Scott_Burroughs

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #84 on: March 02, 2005, 11:47:29 AM »
I do like how the thread has turned in the previous few posts  :o, and sorry for the upcoming turn back to the main subject.

In case anyone was curious, and in case it hasn't been posted yet, but the courses that dropped off the lists are:

Modern

68. Wolf Creek, NV
88. The Gallery (North), AZ
90. Pumpkin Ridge (Ghost Creek), OR
95. Troon G&CC, AZ
98. Grandfather G&CC, NC

Classic

87. CC of Detroit
91. Mountain Ridge, NJ
94. Philadelphia Cricket
96. Monterey Peninsula (Dunes)
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 11:48:19 AM by Scott_Burroughs »

THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #85 on: March 02, 2005, 11:50:43 AM »
Matt Ward's ratings were obviously discounted.  See the former #68 modern.

 ;D

Michael Wharton-Palmer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #86 on: March 02, 2005, 11:58:08 AM »
My top5 exemptions






Pine Valley
Cypress Point
Merion
Royal Birkdale
Pacific Dunes






And the best part..I have had them all ;)







Michael Wharton-Palmer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #87 on: March 02, 2005, 12:11:22 PM »
Thanks Scott,
3 of those listed would still be on my list,
Philly Cricket Club..for the coolest name alone..
MPCC shore
Pumpkin Ridge

Just my opinion, I really dont believe there are 100 courses better than those.

Brian_Gracely

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #88 on: March 02, 2005, 12:13:11 PM »
Has anyone ever done a study to understand what it costs a course for a poor rating?  Is there anything that can be correlated between rating level (Top 10, Top 50, Top 100) and either rounds or greens-fee levels?  


Mike_Cirba

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #89 on: March 02, 2005, 01:30:19 PM »
Kevin Reilly,

Do people really still buy and read "Golf Digest"?   ::) :P

I cancelled my subscription out of pure boredom several years ago and while I'll pick up a newstand copy once in a great while, it seems to have only gotten worse over the years.  

My God, there are so many better regional, national, and international alternatives that I can't believe people still regularly read a magazine chock-full of articles like "How to get out of the sand with one hand".   :-\
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 01:35:41 PM by Mike_Cirba »

Matt_Ward

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #90 on: March 02, 2005, 01:40:44 PM »
Huck:

Glad you mentioned Wolf Creek.

Sad to see it go -- you can be sure it wasn't because of me. ;D

I've played everything worth a darn in the Silver State and Wolf Creek provides the most fun in my book. The likelihood is that the blue bood "I must have my classic designed typed course" types took offense to the "edgy" style that makes Wolf Creek so utterly unpredictable and unique. Wolf Creek is beyond the likes of Shadow Creek, South Shore, Cascata and anything else that comes to mind IMHO.

I've heard people opine about the cart rides -- like that has something to do with the actual architecture -- and few of them really want golf to be different at times.

Wolf Creek is an Indiana Jones type movie. There are more ups and downs throughout the round and I salute Dennis Rider for his desire to provide his take on such a wonderful scale.

Unfortunately, from what I have been told -- Dennis has had his name removed from all official acknowledgements from within the clubhouse concerning his efforts there. A pity that people can be so insensitive.

When I think of Wolf Creek I always envision such grand holes like the par-5 1st, the utterly awesome views from the back tees at #2, the diabolical long par-3 8th and the mesmermizing challenges of the par-4 14th and the risk / reward elements of the par-5 17th.

Wolf Creek's omission may be from GolfWeek but I would certainly recommend it for any golf enthusiast who wants design to feature fun front and center. Wolf Creek has always done that for me.

Kevin_Reilly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #91 on: March 02, 2005, 01:45:13 PM »
Kevin Reilly,

Do people really still buy and read "Golf Digest"?  


Yes, just as people still watch the Oscars despite the fact that everyone says it is boring and worse than the last year and last year was worse than the year before...

I get my copy for free from magscentral.com , just as I also get Golf, Golfworld, and Links for free, so I am happy to avail myself of the monthly slice cure.
"GOLF COURSES SHOULD BE ENJOYED RATHER THAN RATED" - Tom Watson

Mike_Cirba

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #92 on: March 02, 2005, 01:49:12 PM »
Kevin;

Golf Magazine is the Oscars..

Sadly, Golf Digest is the Grammys!!   :-X ;D

You have to love their best newcomer award lists.  There are a lot of parallels.  

Ted Kramer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #93 on: March 02, 2005, 01:49:21 PM »
I have trouble finding much value in ranking the top 1% or 1.43% of anything. Ranking the top 100 classic courses out of 7,000 (1.43%) and the top 100 modern courses out of 10,000 (1%)  is a little silly to me. These courses are all outstanding. Ridgewood CC is in the 70s . . .come on, what is the point?  

-Ted

THuckaby2

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #94 on: March 02, 2005, 01:51:06 PM »
Kevin;

Golf Magazine is the Oscars..

Sadly, Golf Digest is the Grammys!!   :-X ;D

You have to love their best newcomer award lists.  There are a lot of parallels.  

As long as we are going this route....

GolfWeek is the American Piano Tuners Annual Awards Dinner. It's about as well-followed and has about as wide of an audience.

 ;)
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 01:51:47 PM by Tom Huckaby »

Mike Benham

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #95 on: March 02, 2005, 01:55:32 PM »
What's that old saying:

a picture speaks louder than 1000 sex dreams! ;D

"Freud said dreams are like wishes" - Dr. Melfi, Sopranos
"... and I liked the guy ..."

Ted Kramer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #96 on: March 02, 2005, 01:58:27 PM »
Kevin,

You're killing me.

-Ted

Mike_Cirba

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #97 on: March 02, 2005, 01:59:17 PM »
Well, since no one actually can think of a line of defense for the trite tripe issued monthly by Golf Digest, I think we should return our discussion to the following;



Now, there's where I wouldn't mind an instructional article, or two.  

Ted Kramer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #98 on: March 02, 2005, 02:00:58 PM »
Well, since no one actually can think of a line of defense for the trite tripe issued monthly by Golf Digest, I think we should return our discussion to the following;



Now, there's where I wouldn't mind an instructional article, or two.  

man alive.

Mike_Cirba

Re:New Golfweek Rankings
« Reply #99 on: March 02, 2005, 02:01:35 PM »
Kevin,

You beat me to it.  

I knew we could all get along.   ;D