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.


Mike_Cirba

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #50 on: March 08, 2008, 12:40:01 AM »
Kittansett (61) is not a Fred Hood design.  It was designed by William Flynn with possible assistance from Hugh Wilson.  There is no evidence that Hood did anything more than oversee the construction of a project he and a committee put together.  That committee elected to hire Flynn to design the course.  There is enough archival evidence to prove this. 

Perhaps a greater effort needs to be made to make these attributions more accurate and systematic.  A systematic approach works better for attributions than it does for ranking the courses themselves.  Interesting and thought provoking, but not very meaningful.  In my opinion, the architectural attributions should be better presented.

Wayne,

You make a good and fair point about Kittansett and to be fair, it wasn't until your research uncovered the Flynn drawings that the true story came to light.  Has the club acknowledged what's been learned?  Or, are they pulling a Philmont?  ;)

Much, much, MUCH worse is the acknowledgement I saw recently in another magazine for a club you're fairly familiar with.   It was listed as;

MGC - Hugh Wilson 1912, Tom Fazio 2000

At that point, I about wanted to puke.

Whether anyone likes the bunker change reshaping that he did or not, to claim some design attribution to that great course is simply shameful, and the worst kind of revisionist history.

If Tom Fazio hasn't sent a letter to that publication asking that his name be removed as having anything to do with the "design" of that course, he should be disbarred.   And frankly, if the ASGCA had any cuyones, they would reprimand any architect who came into a project selling a "restoration", yet then claimed some direct responsibility for the current creative greatness of a course. 

It's as if George Martin's son did a digital remastering of The White Album and then claimed responsibility for the greatness therein!   ::) ::) ::)
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 01:11:27 AM by MPCirba »

Jim Nugent

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #51 on: March 08, 2008, 01:26:47 AM »
It's interesting to see Augusta at #10.  Not #10 in the world, or #10 overall, but #10 on the Classic Course list.   And it hasn't even drawn a mention in this thread.   For the vast majority of golfers, Augusta would probably be thought of as one of the 2 or 3 best courses in the country, and it seems to always get rated much higher.   


Adding to that, several people in the thread about the best nine holes in the world, say the back nine at ANGC tops the list.  If so, the front nine must be pretty weak...

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #52 on: March 08, 2008, 04:54:36 AM »
Its nice to see Old Town on the list.  The course bowled me over.  I think it also shows, to me anyway, that trying to assign a ranking is dopey.  I look at Pine Needles sitting well above Old Town and imo I could see these two belonging to the same cluster of more or less equal quality though I prefer Old Town by quite a comfortable margin. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #53 on: March 08, 2008, 07:35:32 AM »

Thanks Pat.  But, based on another thread, I suspect Brad Klein has better things to do right now than research the hit rate for Mountain Ridge!

Ed,  You'd be surprised, Brad's pretty efficient and capable of multi-tasking.
[/color]

Do the various publications actively attempt to ensure that the requisite number of raters see a course?

How would they go about doing that ?

They might point the raters in a given direction, but I doubt that any of the publication have or would use influence to get raters on to a golf course.

JAKA B,

I know courses where being a rater will not result in access.
The rater must be a guest of a member
[/color]


wsmorrison

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #54 on: March 08, 2008, 08:05:08 AM »
Mike C,

Although we made the discovery that Flynn (with some assistance from Hugh Wilson) and not Hood was the designer of Kittansett, it has been common knowledge around there for a number of years now.  The club considers itself a Flynn course, though they still honor Hood for his efforts to found and develop the club.  Kittansett had facsimile copies of Flynn's drawings made and they participate in the Flynn Invitational.  Not to recognize Flynn at all is an attribution oversight by the magazine.  Thankfully, Kittansett is not pulling a Philmont, which has zero archival evidence linking Flynn to the design of their North course.  The only thing in print that mentions the designer of Philmont North is a letter from J. Wood Platt citing Park, Jr. as the designer. 

As for Fazio getting design credit for MGC, that is quite a surprise.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 08:40:22 AM by Wayne Morrison »

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #55 on: March 08, 2008, 08:59:35 AM »
We should put together a Classical Top 100 for The Isles...knock that list above into a cocked hat.
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

wsmorrison

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #56 on: March 08, 2008, 09:04:53 AM »
Wayne,

Shinnecock has been in a constant state of renovation since Mark Michaud came over from Pebble and Chas. Stevenson took over the Green Committee. The enlargement of the greens that you mention has been accompanied by the shaving of large greenside chipping areas. Tree removal and/or thinning has been constant and is nearly complete (except for the copse left of the 4th and 6th fairways , which is wetlands). New mowing equipment was procured, and a state-of-the art sprinkler system was installed in the autumn of '05 (with the same folks installing the same system at The National in the autumn of '06). The bunkers have been renovated without redesign.

The end result is that what I've always considered the hardest FAIR test of golf is now also one of the best conditioned. The Sunday morning tragedy during the '04 Open (a USGA blunder witnessed firsthand) did nothing to diminish my feeling that the 18 holes test every club in the bag from every wind direction every time Shinny is played in a breeze. Having played CP and PV, the two above Shinny in the GW ranking, each on a number of occasions, I attest to their greatness. It's just that, for me, Shinnecock Hills Golf Club is as close to a perfect design as I can imagine.

Tom Huckaby states in the post below yours, "I'd concur it (Shinnecock) is likely the best, truest test of golf in America. I just don't think that equals "best". This is an opinion that I respect absolutely. It goes to the age old question of the role of golfing ground in determining the greatness of a course vs. the course architecture and routing. The conflict exists right in Southampton. Crenshaw told me once that he considered The National to be the greatest golfing ground in the world. I agree with that and also find Shinnecock to be the greatest golf course in America. So there we have it, the conundrum of golf.



jkinney,

It sounds like you have a good idea of what's been going on at Shinnecock Hills.  As the green chairman for 20 something years, Charles Stevenson continues to restore and recapture that which was lost either by neglect or by redesign and the course is regaining its full interest and challenge.  As for the tree removal, I know there is still an interest in removing the trees that prevent the 11th green from being a skyline green again.  Lowering the 11th tee back to its original elevation will help a great deal.  Some trees are to be removed along the right side of the 6th hole to open up the view more.  The same should happen along the right side of the 15th between the tee and the bottom of the steep slope.  This should completely open up the view to the green and reveal the right side.

Those short grass chipping areas that are being developed are original to the golf course.  You  can see them on the Flynn plans.  These areas are varied around greens.  Now that the greens are being expanded as far as possible to their original dimensions, newly restored pin positions will be closer to fall-offs and chipping areas and tucked behind bunkers.  These locations will impact decision making all the way back to the tee.  Missing the green will result in far more difficult recoveries.  So far the members are very pleased with the restoration work.  As the course gets firmer and faster through over time, the architecture and maintenance practices will meld perfectly.  One of the great courses in the world will be at its absolute best.

TEPaul

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #57 on: March 08, 2008, 09:53:45 AM »
When CPC first replaced Pine Valley as the #1 course a few years ago on one of those magazine rankings a contingent of four significant CPC members came to Pine Valley. In the parking lot after walking off the 18th green this was overheard from that group:

"My God, our course isn't anywhere near this good."

I'd expect some in this group to challenge that remark because, after-all, what do those members really know about CPC?  ;)

On the other hand, my old friend John Ott (GRHS) who lived at Pine Valley for over 35 years and certainly loved the course immensely when he heard CPC had finally replaced PVGC as #1 said:

"I can understand that."
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 09:56:50 AM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #58 on: March 08, 2008, 09:58:55 AM »
Wayne,

Here's but one example;

http://www.sportsnetwork.com/default.asp?c=sportsnetwork&page=golf-m/misc/course_reviews/merion_east.htm

I think you'll find that if you google "Hugh Wilson Tom Fazio Merion" you'll find it's all over the Internet.   

I'm not sure the source, but it's pretty ridiculous.

Tom Huckaby

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #59 on: March 08, 2008, 09:59:22 AM »
The first of the whines comes from Philadelphia.

WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS, WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS... no time for losers, for we are the champions....

of the (USA - in this case)!!!!

I don't expect you to recognize the Queen song Tom, but some might.
 ;D ;D ;D

I absolutely love it.  CPC (and California) rules.

BTW to Pat Mucci - the question wasn't clubs where raters would have to be accompanied by members - there are MANY of those - the question was where they are actively PROHIBITED from playing, regardless of who they are with or not with.  Do you know any of those?  I swear there are a few...

TH


wsmorrison

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #60 on: March 08, 2008, 10:21:22 AM »
What whines are you referring to, Huck?  This is Philadelphia, we don't whine, we kick ass.  Whining is for left coasters.  ;D

I did not see a single Philadelphian remark about the rankings.  It seems to me we were more interested in correcting errors in architectural attributions; a much more productive and factual effort than considering the subjective differences between 1 and 2 or any other course comparison on or off the list. 

It is a list and not proof of anything, unless of course it confirms your own beliefs, then it is conclusive, right?  ;) :D

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #61 on: March 08, 2008, 10:41:00 AM »
I cant stand the Top 100 Lists. I think its a bunch of nonsense. Being in the business, the only result I see from it is a bunch of chest pounding and political drama. There are definetely some courses on there that shouldnt be where they are at. I dont take it seriously at all.

Jim Nugent

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #62 on: March 08, 2008, 11:13:29 AM »
When CPC first replaced Pine Valley as the #1 course a few years ago on one of those magazine rankings a contingent of four significant CPC members came to Pine Valley. In the parking lot after walking off the 18th green this was overheard from that group:

"My God, our course isn't anywhere near this good."


Are you sure that really happened? 

Tom Huckaby

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #63 on: March 08, 2008, 11:49:31 AM »
What whines are you referring to, Huck?  This is Philadelphia, we don't whine, we kick ass.  Whining is for left coasters.  ;D

I did not see a single Philadelphian remark about the rankings.  It seems to me we were more interested in correcting errors in architectural attributions; a much more productive and factual effort than considering the subjective differences between 1 and 2 or any other course comparison on or off the list. 

It is a list and not proof of anything, unless of course it confirms your own beliefs, then it is conclusive, right?  ;) :D

Tom Paul is not a Philadelphian?  That was not a whine that poor ole Pine Valley slipped to #2?

And of course correcting attributions has more worth; giving shit about rankings is just WAY WAY WAY more fun.

 ;D


John Kavanaugh

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #64 on: March 08, 2008, 11:57:23 AM »
Huck,

Would you travel out east and only play Pine Valley?  Would you insist on also seeing Merion and National?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #65 on: March 08, 2008, 12:03:04 PM »
Huck,

Looks like 10 to 8 in favor of PA over CA...and if I counted everything within three hours drive of my home it would be not be pretty...

Keep strutin' but you won't get any offers from a Philly guy to switch sides...

TEPaul

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #66 on: March 08, 2008, 12:20:59 PM »
"Are you sure that really happened? "

Jim:

Yes, 100%


Huck:

Believe me, we around here don't whine when some magazine ranks CPC #1 ahead of PV from time to time. CPC is a great, great course but it doesn't bother us at all for the simple reason we know what the #1 course and architecture in America and the world is. We don't need magazines to inform us of stuff like that. Matter of fact, it's actually more a matter of humor to us that people actually think these magazines know what they're talking about. How could any of these magazines know what they're talking about when not a single one of them has ever listed Fernandina Beach Muncipal GC as the greatest hidden gem in the world?
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 12:34:55 PM by TEPaul »

John Kirk

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #67 on: March 08, 2008, 12:32:36 PM »
Huck,

Looks like 10 to 8 in favor of PA over CA...and if I counted everything within three hours drive of my home it would be not be pretty...

Keep struttin' but you won't get any offers from a Philly guy to switch sides...

Huck, I'll take this one...

Ask 100 "core" golfers the following question:

"Congratulations, you have won a one week, unlimited golf package.  During that week, you can play any course within two hours driving distance of Philadelphia or San Jose.  Which do you choose?"

I'm sure Philadelphia has more courses with outstanding shot values, but the decision to choose San Francisco and the Monterey Peninsula is a no-brainer.  The natural beauty of these places is unmatched, and that's more important than internal green contouring.  Our great courses aren't chopper liver, either.

C'mon out west, Philadelphia.  We'll show some real beauty.

Cordially,

The West Coast


P.S.  Shoulders back, bent over slowly, puff out feathers a bit, scratch ground furiously and begin strut...

"Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck.  Cluck!"
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 12:44:43 PM by John Kirk »

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #68 on: March 08, 2008, 12:49:05 PM »
TEP,

nice try, but you can't get much by us. Note our listing:

Golfweek's State-by-State Best You Can Play Public Courses for 2008

Florida
13. Golf Club of North Hampton, Fernandina Beach (m)
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 01:00:17 PM by Brad Klein »

Mike_Cirba

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #69 on: March 08, 2008, 12:59:37 PM »
I've been to the west coast.

It's beautiful.

It sho' ain't Pine Valley. 

It ain't even Sand Hills.  ;D

Kyle Harris

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #70 on: March 08, 2008, 01:08:26 PM »
Huck,

Looks like 10 to 8 in favor of PA over CA...and if I counted everything within three hours drive of my home it would be not be pretty...

Keep struttin' but you won't get any offers from a Philly guy to switch sides...

Huck, I'll take this one...

Ask 100 "core" golfers the following question:

"Congratulations, you have won a one week, unlimited golf package.  During that week, you can play any course within two hours driving distance of Philadelphia or San Jose.  Which do you choose?"

I'm sure Philadelphia has more courses with outstanding shot values, but the decision to choose San Francisco and the Monterey Peninsula is a no-brainer.  The natural beauty of these places is unmatched, and that's more important than internal green contouring.  Our great courses aren't chopper liver, either.

C'mon out west, Philadelphia.  We'll show some real beauty.

Cordially,

The West Coast


P.S.  Shoulders back, bent over slowly, puff out feathers a bit, scratch ground furiously and begin strut...

"Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck.  Cluck!"

You can take their golf carts, beer coolers and mulligans as well.

Within 2 hours drive of Philadelphia is a good portion of the New York area courses.

wsmorrison

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #71 on: March 08, 2008, 01:10:19 PM »
Huck,

I don't think Tom Paul would consider himself anything but a broken down New York living in Pennsylvania.  Just because his family owned land before that Johnny-come-lately William Penn arrived on the scene, it doesn't make him a Pennsylvanian.  We've adopted him, but we're Quakers and we'll take anybody ;)

In any case, that wasn't wasn't whining.  Just fact.

C'mon out west, Philadelphia.  We'll show some real beauty.

John,

That's California Dreamin'.  You can have your beauty.  I'll take our golf courses.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #72 on: March 08, 2008, 01:18:04 PM »

P.S.  Shoulders back, bent over slowly, puff out feathers a bit, scratch ground furiously and begin strut...

"Cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck.  Cluck!"

That's strutin' sittin' down after that offering...

give me the 3 hours drive I mentioned and I can get to Southampton, NY...then you can have the entire state of California...including Mexico...

No question, California topography is amazing...but I can take walk and enjoy it...and this is not one of those "if Pebble were in Kansas" points, it's just that this is a golf course question...and not much of one at that...

Tom Huckaby

Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #73 on: March 08, 2008, 01:20:40 PM »
There's more whine (wine) on here in the last few hours than in all of Napa valley.

Excuses, excuses, explanations, explanations, changing the question, jeez you guys will do anything except acknowledge the cold hard truth.

WE'RE NUMBER ONE!  WE'RE NUMBER ONE!

Or as we liked to say in high school when the game was winding down and we were ahead...

SCOREBOARD!  SCOREBOARD!
 ;D ;D ;D

TH

ps - John Kirk, you remain a very wise man.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 01:23:32 PM by Tom Huckaby »

Mike Policano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweek's Top 100 Classical
« Reply #74 on: March 08, 2008, 02:21:41 PM »
Gents,

Notwithstanding John Kirk is a wise man.  North Jersey is the place to be.  Forget three hours, two hours away is bookended by Shinny, Pine Valley and Merion.  There are 8 NJ courses in the top 100 Classic, 14 in NY and 6 in Pa. All within 2 hours of North Jersey.

Furthermore, NJ has Pat Mucci's right hand.  Come to think it, it has Pat Mucci's left hand also.  Only NJ provides "color" on this board.

Finally, if you live in North Jersey, you can eat anything you want.  The air alone will kill you.