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.


John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #75 on: June 21, 2008, 12:21:27 AM »
Doug, as a reader of GOLFWEEK you can certainly contact Brad to suggest that some worthy courses be placed on the ballot for consideration.  He will check with his contacts to verify legitimacy and assuming they pass (which is likely) they will be on a list with a "priority" designation.

The magazine's panelists will then make an effort to see them.

I know you don't believe it, Doug, but the process is inclusive, not exclusive.

I have nominated courses that I felt were overlooked and they subsequently were added to the ballot.  Please note that only the top 7% of all courses in the country are ballot-worthy, so a course can be well above average and still not be on the list.  The goal is to identify America's Best, not America's "Pretty Good" or "Better Than Average".

This isn't like sausage and politics.  There's no problem seeing the rankings made.  I remember Brad was keen on adding panelists in very remote parts of the country since new courses are being added in areas like Western Colorado, Wyoming, and Idaho.  The panel does a very good job representing average avid golfers.  He saw an opportunity for improvement and addressed it.

You're very wrong to allege that all panel members are only interested in free rounds at top-tier courses.  My recent visits have specifically sought out daily-fee options in areas I've visited and I also ponied up $211 for a golf course that is not as good as other courses in that market charging one-fifth that amount.  I know, I've played those too.

How many panel members have you played with?  Your experiences don't mirror mine.  I'm sorry you haven't seen the good apples in the bunch.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 12:45:40 AM by John_Conley »

Jim Nugent

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #76 on: June 21, 2008, 01:50:32 AM »
John, can Doug contact Brad Klein about becoming a rater? 

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #77 on: June 21, 2008, 02:42:06 AM »
Ryan Farrow,

I'm curious what you mean by "computer-generated." The list isn't produced by some formula, like the BCS college footballs series results. It's the product of simple entry and averaging. For years we calculated it by hand. Now we enter it electronically. It's no more computer-generated than your writing in on GCA. That's not "computer-generated" either.

We add courses all of the time and encourage raters to see wider and more far than the standard elite courses. So some folks disagree with our results. Fine. If we've mis-listed or mnis-categorized a course, we'll correct it. But there's no way in the world you can do a municipal list and decide that beyond a certain price point -- which threshold is inherently contestable ($75, $100, $125) -- it's no longer municipal. I do agree that municipal (city, county, state) ownership and the existence of a favorable residential rate are crucial.

Craig Sweet

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #78 on: June 21, 2008, 06:06:48 AM »
I was going to make the point about Bethpage not being a muni because it is a state run operation....but I guess Brad makes the list and he can be as foot loose with it as he likes...

I'm surprised none of the "muni's" in Spokane made the list....and Eastmoreland not making the list...
Project 2025....All bow down to our new authoritarian government.

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #79 on: June 21, 2008, 06:35:11 AM »
Craig, I'm not trying to be foot loose. It's just the political scientist in me. Government jurisdiction is the criterion that counts.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2008, 07:16:23 AM »
There are several mentions for Eastmoreland.  I played it last year.  I'd say it isn't close to the quality golf course my regular home course municipal, Brown County GC.  Much is due to maintenance meld where it seems the bones are there at Eastmoreland, but the greens and surrounds are softened and mellowed out over many years, ad trees are a nusance in some spots. 

Many who have played Brown County think it is as good or better than Brown Deer County GC where they currently hold the Milwaukee Open (US Bank), and is on the list. 
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Craig Van Egmond

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #81 on: June 21, 2008, 12:51:25 PM »

Craig,

      Indian Canyon, Spokane's finest muni, made the list at #20.




Ryan Farrow

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #82 on: June 21, 2008, 01:40:29 PM »
Ryan Farrow,

I'm curious what you mean by "computer-generated." The list isn't produced by some formula, like the BCS college footballs series results. It's the product of simple entry and averaging. For years we calculated it by hand. Now we enter it electronically. It's no more computer-generated than your writing in on GCA. That's not "computer-generated" either.

We add courses all of the time and encourage raters to see wider and more far than the standard elite courses. So some folks disagree with our results. Fine. If we've mis-listed or mnis-categorized a course, we'll correct it. But there's no way in the world you can do a municipal list and decide that beyond a certain price point -- which threshold is inherently contestable ($75, $100, $125) -- it's no longer municipal. I do agree that municipal (city, county, state) ownership and the existence of a favorable residential rate are crucial.


Brad, from your responses it seems like you took your ratings list and crossed off every course that was not categorized as municipal. Thats what I mean by my comment, as if you just hit two buttons on Excel and their is your list, now the only decision is how large to make the list?

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #83 on: June 21, 2008, 02:41:56 PM »
Actually, I hit one button, "municipal," since we've already categorized every golf course into one or more categories. What I am I supposed to do, throw out the ones I think the raters have overvalued and add the ones they overlooked? That's the point of a rating system. If that makes it computerized, it's just an electronic abacus.

Matt_Ward

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #84 on: June 21, 2008, 02:51:14 PM »
The likely best way to define such courses is quite simple ...

Taxpayer-owned facilities. No doubt that would lump city, county and state facilities under one umbrella. No doubt one could create a separate listing under each heading if you wanted to do that.

Brad Klein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #85 on: June 21, 2008, 03:03:40 PM »
Yikes, Matt and I agree. I better rethink my position.

Matt_Ward

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #86 on: June 21, 2008, 03:05:31 PM »
Brad:

That's nice to know agreements can come from different directions. ;D

Truthfully, Hominy Hill was a glaring omission -- also, you could add Knoll / West (Charles Banks) as well because either of these two is better than a number of the ones listed now.

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #87 on: June 21, 2008, 03:17:54 PM »
I think Lederach qualifies as it is owned by the Township of Lower Salford and. although managed by Billy Casper Golf, residents do receive a modest break on rates.
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Paul Payne

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #88 on: June 21, 2008, 05:40:22 PM »
C'mon ...  Bear Trace?

I am not a fan of any of the Tennessee "trail" courses. Not that there is not potential, but they struggle with maintenance and conditions all the time. Not to mention that if you consider these to be "muni's" then you would have to account for the entire RTJ trail in Alabama.

Furthermore there is NO WAY Bear Trace is a better course than Harding. None! I would vote Geroge Dunne in Chicago for example, as a true muni over any of the Tennessee trail (no offense because there are some fine courses in TN)

I have to believe this is a classic tip of the hat to Jack. Makes me question the merit of the entire list.


John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #89 on: June 21, 2008, 07:08:19 PM »
John, can Doug contact Brad Klein about becoming a rater? 

Jim, this question makes as little sense as the couple that asked me if I thought they could try to play a course in Naples without paying. 

Doug can do whatever he wants.

Tim Bert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #90 on: June 21, 2008, 07:47:25 PM »
I have only played Ross Creek Landing one day (54 holes) so I can't speak to "normal" conditions. The day we played it the course was in wonderful shape. I thought the course was great - the best Nicklaus course I've played in my limited experience. Head and shoulders above the rest of Bear Trace courses. Terrible spot for a golf course. Not sure how it has been maintaied since the whole financial issue that went on. Certainly better than the criticism leveled here. Top 10 muni in the counrty?  I haven't played enough to comment. I have played Wintonbury several times and Ross Creek definitely has a "grander" feel which might appeal more to raters. I'd rather play Wintonbury as my regular course, but if that is top 10 as well I don't think Ross Creek is in the wrong company. I think there was a third one on the list I have played as well so I do have a little point of reference.

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #91 on: June 21, 2008, 09:16:35 PM »
Regarding Eastmoreland in Portland....  I played it the day after the USGA Publinks.  It was simply an amazing golf course under that maintenance regimine.   A true case study of the maintenance meld!

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #92 on: June 22, 2008, 11:38:23 AM »
...
Another stupid list that shows no visits.
...

OK Barney, you can edit your profile and put your real name back in it.
 ;D
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #93 on: June 22, 2008, 11:45:12 AM »
...Please note that only the top 7% of all courses in the country are ballot-worthy...

If this is true, then it seems this particular listing would seem to me to be a farce. A "muni" would have to be in the top 7% in it's area to be rated. Seems that would leave many munis of note out of the balloting. I would find it hard to believe they would leave Eastmoreland out of the balloting, but if they are only balloting the top 7% of courses in he Portland area, perhaps they did.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #94 on: June 22, 2008, 02:11:04 PM »
Garland:  Eastmoreland is on the ballot.  It must not have scored high enough to make the list.  While people can quibble back and forth about this course or that one, I'm going to focus on how closely bunched a lot of these courses are.  #3 Indian Wells scored 6.14 - #9 Thunderhawk is at 5.86.  Not much of a spread.

#11 Bear Trace is at 5.71 and #27 Chaska is at 5.36.  The scoring system is similar to the Doak Scale, so realize that to be just out of the Top Ten you need two 6 ratings for each 5 and you'll barely make the list with one 6 ratings for two 5s.  A place where everyone agrees that the course is a 5 doesn't even come near the 30th spot.

How good is Eastmoreland?  Realize that just because you think it is better than something that 'made it' doesn't matter much, even if you are added to the panel and place your vote.  There are probably enough votes already cast that place it as merely very good instead of truly special.

My 7% number is an estimate of all courses on the ballot divided by all courses in America.  You are right...something could be under the radar and not considered for a list like this.  While I don't think it is happening very often, sleep well knowing that a mechanism exists to add courses to the ballot.

I'm unclear as to why so many people question the methods used by GOLFWEEK to determine "America's Best".  I guess it proves the old adage you can't please all the people all the time.

Paul Payne

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #95 on: June 22, 2008, 02:28:35 PM »
John,

Exactly how is that score calculated?

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #96 on: June 22, 2008, 02:59:04 PM »
As Brad says above, arithmetic mean.  Average.

Paul Payne

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #97 on: June 22, 2008, 04:13:26 PM »
Thanks John but the mean of what? Celebrity tee times?? Distance from my house??

John_Conley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #98 on: June 22, 2008, 04:17:18 PM »
Thanks John but the mean of what? Celebrity tee times?? Distance from my house??

Ratings.  C'mon.  It isn't that hard.

Paul Payne

Re: Golfweeks Best Munis
« Reply #99 on: June 22, 2008, 10:10:11 PM »
John,

Maybe everyone else here knows but exactly what are they rating? Do they have specific categorties they rate? Do some things weigh in more heavily than others? Or is this just more like the Doak scale, one number and done?