[Bob_Huntley]

Cypress Point proves the point about one slight imperfection, see the 18th hole.

As much as I like North Berwick the opening hole would cost it a point on my evaluation.

I would agree with Michael WP on Royal Birkdale. I was talking about the course and extolling its virtues years and years ago to Tom Huckaby, I am not sure he ever got there.


Bob

[Bob_Huntley]

Back to the original question.

Fishers Island N.Y. is a ten in my book and no amount of criticism would change my mind.

Bob

[Tom Huckaby]

I would agree with Michael WP on Royal Birkdale. I was talking about the course and extolling its virtues years and years ago to Tom Huckaby, I am not sure he ever got there.


Bob

Oh Bob, Bob, Bob....

Would I EVER fail to get to somewhere you recommended if I had any chance to do so?

Just as you steered me to Western Gailes, you also steered me to Birkdale.  And I loved it and have praised and defended it ever since.  The next time you steer me wrong (outside of outwitting me in a Wolf game) will be the first.

  

If anyone wants to say Birkdale is a 10, I surely won't argue.  But I bet others here will.  It doesn't seem to get much love in this forum.

TH

ps - Cypress is a great example of meeting the REVISED definition... as much as some hate 18, it's hard to deny it adds something of value to the golf course - that something being a very tough and unique, if crazy, finisher.

[wsmorrison]

Bob,

Since Tom makes an allowance here and there with weak holes on some of his selections, I choose to overlook the so-so first hole at NB (more than a slight imperfection) and reward the rest of the course with the coveted 10.

Pebble Beach is not higher than an 8 for me.  There's just too much mediocrity mixed in with the greatness for anything higher.   Frankly, I wouldn't argue with a 7 for the course.

[Tom Huckaby]

Bob,

Since Tom makes an allowance here and there with weak holes on some of his selections, I choose to overlook the so-so first hole at NB (more than a slight imperfection) and reward the rest of the course with the coveted 10.

Pebble Beach is not higher than an 8 for me.  There's just too much mediocrity mixed in with the greatness for anything higher.   Frankly, I wouldn't argue with a 7 for the course.

And with all due respect you remain cock-eyed about Pebble, Wayne.  But that's OK, we all have our foibles.  And yes we have debated this too many times already.  You just didn't expect to slip that by without rebuttal, did you?


TH

[Jim Franklin]

Back to the original question.

Fishers Island N.Y. is a ten in my book and no amount of criticism would change my mind.

Bob

I would have to agree with this one. It really gets better and more fun every time I visit. I think those greens could be the best set anywhere. I also think Ballyneal could be a 10 and I would also give Victoria National a 10.

[Gene Greco]

  Interesting.

Though I believe it to be a 10.......................

............... my copy of TCG (without pics) has Shinnecock at a 9.

Did the printing of TCG with pics upgrade it to a 10??

[PThomas]

Back to the original question.

Fishers Island N.Y. is a ten in my book and no amount of criticism would change my mind.

Bob

I would have to agree with this one. It really gets better and more fun every time I visit. I think those greens could be the best set anywhere.

only a 7 in Tom's book

[Anthony Gray]

  I know it is not a popular choice but Cruden Bay is a ten for me . It is a course that I go out of my way to play, no weak holes, if one hole was removed it would change the experience. On the fun scale my number one.You never feel beat up after a round at Cruden Bay. Great post round view from the clubhouse. The starter even wears a coat and tie.

[wsmorrison]

Of course not, Huck.  I'm just as stubborn as ever  

Gene, Shinnecock is only a 10 for now.  Once all the greens are expanded, the 11th tee lowered and a few fairway lines revised, it will be the world's only 20!

[Jim Franklin]

Of course not, Huck.  I'm just as stubborn as ever  

Gene, Shinnecock is only a 10 for now.  Once all the greens are expanded, the 11th tee lowered and a few fairway lines revised, it will be the world's only 20!

And still not as good as National which is a 21.

[Tom Huckaby]

Of course not, Huck.  I'm just as stubborn as ever  

Gene, Shinnecock is only a 10 for now.  Once all the greens are expanded, the 11th tee lowered and a few fairway lines revised, it will be the world's only 20!

Very cool, Wayne.  And that's interesting re Shinnecock.. those changes will get it within 2 of Sand Hills.

 

TH

ps - I do sincerely believe Shinnecock merits a very solid 10.

pss to Jim - great minds thinking along the same lines! 

[wsmorrison]

Jim,

NGLA is a solid 9.0263018815 give or take 0.0000000003 

[Jim Franklin]

Jim,

NGLA is a solid 9.0263018815 give or take 0.0000000003 

That's funny.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I have Huck and Bob with me on Royal Birkdale...thats good enough for me.
And I agree with Bob on Western Gailes as well.
If I could only play two links courses in the British Isles they would be my two.

[Tom Huckaby]

Well Michael, Huntley is an asset for sure... I'd have to say I am a liability.

But those are two darn fine golf courses.   

[Phil McDade]

Question:

Can the merits of almost all of a course's holes -- and the merits of the course overall, be it setting, routing, other factors -- overcome one or perhaps (at the most) two less-than-great holes and still merit a 10? Are 16 truly outstanding holes, in every conceivable way, enough for a 10?

Tom Doak suggests so, in his comments on Ballybunion. Others, as Bob suggests, might suggest Cypress save for the 18th. Wayne makes a good argument about the average-ness (for his tastes) of several Pebble Beach holes downgrading that course from a potential 10.

Re. Royal County Down, I think Doak gave Machrihanish a 7, which at first I thought was a bit under-rated. But the course's back nine lacks the wonderous tumult of the front nine, and the last two holes really are just average. Based on the conversation here, I'm not sure it's a 10* (new category: a 10 with an asterisk is a course in which your golfing resume would be incomplete if you missed it; it has to be seen, for the overall merits of the course and its outstanding run of holes, but there may be something that's less-than-perfect on a hole or two.) Machrihanish is probably a 7 or 8, for me.

[Tom Huckaby]

Phil:

It's Doak's scale and he pretty clearly stated that not every hole need be world class for a course to be a 10.  The constant use of this "if you miss one hole you're missing something" tended to get people off the track, citing one not so perfect golf hole as reason for disinclusion - and that's not what he intended.  I'd say it's pretty obvious that you consider the overall WHOLE of the golf course, not any one particular HOLE, in making this assessment.

Capitals inserted for smartass effect based on previous comments....

Now if you want to change the definitions to meet your own personal take on things, that's great... that 10* is interesting for sure.

But the Doak definition - as revised by Huckaby -  needs no asterisk.   

[Matt_Ward]

Phil M:

You raise a very interesting dynamic. I don't doubt that other elements of a given course may be able to bail out those items that are deficient -- but the first among equals for me rests to a large degree on the totality of the actual holes and the sheer range / diversity of shots the player must execute. No doubt you and others may elevate other items in the first among equals role.

For example, I don't see Pebble Beach as a 10. There are just too many inferior holes among the bunch. No doubt the course does throw forward a number of truly outstanding holes -- candidly, the 6th, 7th and 8th may be the best combination of sequential holes that have a par-3, par-4 and par-5 in their mixture.

Keep in mind that hole positioning does reflect a certain mood too -- especially when those holes bring the golfer to a final conclusion. That's why for me RCD is less than a 10 -- the 17th and 18th holes are really much less when compared to the striking character and flow of so many of the holes that precede them. When you couple the fact that the final two holes should be, at least in my opinion, a summary statement of what the round has been -- the disappointment I felt was certainly present. Take nothing away from the other elements of RCD -- my God, a 9 isn't exactly a failing grade.

Jon W:

Doak has his opinion -- I have mine. I love RCD but the last two holes do matter and they do, at least in my mind, take the place down just enough to keep it from getting the perfect score of 10.

Rich G:

I like Carnoustie too but the actual land the course finds itself is not very inspiring. Ditto the difficulty meter that runs towards the very high side. I see Carnoustie like I view Winged Foot / West - I admire their overall tenacity but it's always more about respect than real love. No more than 9's in both cases.

Philippe Binette:

If you think Wild Horse is a 10 -- then I have another public candidate that can match that -- Black Mesa. All kidding aside -- I don't see either as a 10 but I can tell you that the NM layout for me is the better of the two.

[Will E]

Put me down as a guy who thinks RCD is better than any of the 9 courses I've played on Doak's list. I really like the last three holes, they are much improved versions of the ones I played in '96.

If there's a better course in the world I haven't seen it               yet.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Phil

I say it depends on how the holes relate to the rest of the course, how they contribute to the routing.  This involves a number of issues.

Additionally, I disagree with many's apparent definition of "perfection" as based on a reductionist analysis of the quality of the individual holes.  This may apply to certain fields but when you're talking beauty there is a certain type of "imperfection" which is essential to that beauty.

Although this discussion goes back to Socrates and Plato, John Ruskin in his defense of the vernacular Gothic architecture in Northern Europe ("The Stones of Venice") made a great argument against "perfection" in the arts, an argument that Wethered & Simpson actually took up in their discussion of an "ideal" golf course.

They wrote that a course made of nothing but "world's greatest" holes would be not a joy but a heavy burden if one were condemned to play it every day.

True, some "imperfect" holes or "imperfect" features are just bad, thus the caveat that a certain type of "imperfection" -- see, it's not really "imperfection" if you're looking at the sum total of the course, rather than its component parts -- is needed to elevate rather than harm the course's quality.

Tolstoy hit the imperfection nail on the beauty head when he wrote: "As is always the case with a thoroughly attractive woman, her defect--the shortness of her upper lip and her half-open mouth--seemed to be her own special and peculiar form of beauty."

(That Princess Bolkonskaya was a hair-lip hottie!)

So: CPC 18 sounds like it fits this criteria.  I liked the NLE dogleg par 3 at Pebble for this reason as well.

Mark

PS Ganton is a 10 in my book.  I find it understandable but ultimately amazing that so many lump it together with Woodhall Spa.  I liked the latter, but the former is the very embodiment of sublime greatness, with its bunkering, excellent use of angles, perfectly-tied in greens, and (credit to Sean Arble) grade-level architecture.

Interestingly, echoing comments on CPC and Newcastle, 18 would get my vote as Ganton's weakest hole.  Bring back PANDY!

[Tom Huckaby]

Matt Ward:

All of that and you still won't admit to a simple error?

Come on man... it's not hard... type those w an r keys... this is like Fonzi back in Happy Days....

Tom, I was w w w w r r r ong.....

And remember, again the issue is Doak's definition - not yours or anyone's intepretation of it.  He requires no perfection.

TH

[Phil McDade]

Mark:

Was it you that brought up the notion of a symphony in another, somewhat recent, thread? I hear what you're saying -- I, too, often think of the entirety of the course, not just individual holes and the merits, in evaluating it. Courses ought to have an ebb and flow, a certain rythym -- in short, the sum being greater than its collective parts. (I've played courses where the exact opposite is true -- lots of holes of individual merit, but the whole thing fails to add up.)

[Tom Huckaby]

Phil/Mark:

My feeling is that's the far better way to look at this also - as a whole and not some holes.  And imperfection can add to the greatness without a doubt.

TH

[Gene Greco]

Of course not, Huck.  I'm just as stubborn as ever  

Gene, Shinnecock is only a 10 for now.  Once all the greens are expanded, the 11th tee lowered and a few fairway lines revised, it will be the world's only 20!

Indeed, Shinnecock (along with Oakmont) is the most improved classic golf course in the US over the last 20 years.

Tom Paul's "maintenance meld" has reached a state of near perfection and those responsible should take a bow. The changes which have been made have been very well thought out and carried through beautifully.

Furthermore, out of ten rounds I would prefer to play five each at Shinnecock and NGLA. Twenty years ago it would have been 6/4 in favor of The National.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()