I'll say this, in my defense which seems to need quite a lot of defending, and for Kingsley Club whcih doesn't need me to defend it... 
I really, really like the Kingsley Club. Kingsley would be 11th on my list.
It is not on my top five, easily.
It is not easily excluded from my second five. And that's where the fun begins. To those who'd list KC ahead of Arcadia Bluffs, I'd say to them, "It's not a fair fight. Kingsley was built on a nice, ordinary parcel. Arcadia was built on one of the most spectacular parcels available in Michigan in a quarter-century. Nothing against Kingsley."
The other second-five of mine are based largely on archtectural merit/provenance, and enjoyable playability. If you gave me 10 rounds at Forest Dunes and Kingsley, it would be 6-4 for Forest Dunes, just because I like playing there that wee bit more.
I know there are many here who discount CCD; I just happen to think it is a great parkland golf course. My choice of DGC South (that's the Par-68 short course at DGC -- the baby-brother of the North Course!) is one I thought I'd catch some flack for choosing. But I think a lot of people understand that is a very nicely preserved little Ross gem that can and will no doubt be polished even more with careful restorative work.
I also happen to think (maybe its architect will know better than me; I expect he will) that the Kingsley Club will benefit greatly with maturation over the next ten years. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if I were forced to include it in a future list. It is not the most generous turf-growing season up there in Traverse City. I kind of wonder what Crystal Downs looked like in its third summer of operation.
As Tim said, the differing of opinions is what makes this site great, and reading responses like Chuck's and seeing how different they are from your own is fun/interesting/enlightening/baffling/etc etc. Like I said before, to each their own, and this is in no way an attack on Chuck, just a differing opinion:
- I would agree w/ Tim that our criteria for a great parcel of land for golf must be quite different. Yes, Arcadia is a SPECTACULAR piece of property, and it is hard to think of a better spot to spend a late summer sunset than on that porch, but from purely a golfing standpoint the interest in the land at Kingsley's location is infinitely more interesting than Arcadia's. Remember, most of the what exists at Arcadia is man-made (but even though it clearly shows, I think they did a good job). It is true that KC doesn't have any lake views or tee boxes perched 200 ft above the water, but the endlessly varied humps, bumps and movement at KC make it a much more fun, strategic and dare I say "pure" golf experience (IMO of course). It's impossible to
create that interest...nobody can compete with mother nature. It is more than a fair fight.
- If you're holding KC back due to playing conditions, you must not have visited in quite some time (or simply put a premium on lush, green, soft playing conditions). The playing conditions at the Kingsley Club are without a doubt some of the (if not
the) best playing conditions I have ever seen/experienced. Firm and fast
perfection, thanks to Dan Lucas and his staff.
My list is coming up.
Cheers!