News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #50 on: November 30, 2009, 02:35:42 PM »
Quote from: Ian_Linford on November 30, 2009, 01:39:51 PM
One more interesting point:
I believe at the beginning of this project Tom D suggested that a vote of 8 or higher is essentially a vote for a Top 100 course.  He appeared concerned that voters without experience would vote too many courses too high.  Interestingly, the 100th course on both lists is rated at only 7.4, and there are only 49 courses that received an 8.0 or higher rating in the "raw" rankings.  Any thoughts on this?

Ian:

That is the way it's supposed to work.  If giving a course an '8' means you think it's a top 100 course and giving it a '7' means you don't think it is, quite, than an average of 7.5 means half the panelists thought it should make the list and half didn't, and that's what it should take to just barely make the top 100.

The list of courses that had good votes but less than ten of them looks about right, too.  Too bad so few have played Hirono and Kawana and Morfontaine.  The only course I was surprised to see there was St. Germain, which had hardly any support for the GOLF Magazine list back when I ran it.
Logged

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #51 on: November 30, 2009, 02:47:16 PM »
Quote from: Kenny Baer on November 30, 2009, 02:12:06 PM
Why does 31 people playing ANGC sound high?  Out of 1,500 hard core golfers.

I guess it's a pretty tough ticket!  ;D

Maybe your pro could make a couple of calls.............
Logged

Cristian

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #52 on: November 30, 2009, 02:53:40 PM »
great list! Thanks for the effort!

No Morfontaine? Nom de dieu!

(or < 10 raters)

It would be interesting to see the courses that have scored high enough to merit a spot in the top 100, but were seen by less than 10. This should be hidden gems!

Edit:
Oops found it thanks!
« Last Edit: November 30, 2009, 02:58:02 PM by Cristian Willaert »
Logged

Peter Pratt

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #53 on: November 30, 2009, 03:16:44 PM »
Highest ranked courses on Golf Magazine’s top 100 that aren’t in gca.com’s top 100. Hirono, Morfontaine, Kawana, and Nanea had too few votes, but high enough scores.

39.   Hirono
49.   Baltusrol (Lower)
54.   Morfontaine
55.   Nine Bridges
57.   Oak Hill
62.   Medinah (#3)
64.   Loch Lomond
68.   Inverness
69.    Old Sandwich
72.   Royal Adelaide

73.   Harbour Town
74.   Kawana (Fuji)
75.     Nanea
76.    Valderrama
77.   Chambers Bay
78.   Kauri Cliffs
79.    Somerset Hills
85.   European Club
88.   Oitavos Dunes
91.   Waterville

94.    Durban
96.   Scioto
97.    Tokyo
99.   Naruo
100.   Royal Porthcawl
Logged

Jim Colton

Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #54 on: November 30, 2009, 03:54:01 PM »
Peter,

 Can you also post the corresponding list of GCA top 100 courses that aren't on GM.

  Jim
Logged

JSPayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #55 on: November 30, 2009, 03:57:07 PM »
So who's gonna be the first GCAer to go out on a mission to play the GCA Top 100 list and make a blog about it?  ;D

I'd be curious to know not the person exactly, but what the max courses played on the nominated list of 412 by a SINGLE rater was.

Likewise would be interested to know if anyone is already close to having played the whole "unofficial" list(s) posted above.

I'm lucky if I could count on two hands the number of courses I've played from those lists. Does that make me eligible for banishment from this site?  ??? Hope not.....I'm still just a GCA-student in training.  ;)
Logged
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best, night and day, to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human being can fight; and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings

Kenny Baer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #56 on: November 30, 2009, 04:08:44 PM »
Quote from: Bill_McBride on November 30, 2009, 02:47:16 PM
Quote from: Kenny Baer on November 30, 2009, 02:12:06 PM
Why does 31 people playing ANGC sound high?  Out of 1,500 hard core golfers.

I guess it's a pretty tough ticket!  ;D

Maybe your pro could make a couple of calls.............

Already has
Logged

Bill Brightly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #57 on: November 30, 2009, 05:21:45 PM »
Is the Sheep Ranch THAT good? I've never played there, so I am curious. I know it gets a lot of love here on GCA, is the rating slanted in its favor because it is a GCA darling, ahead of courses like Ridgewood and Oak Hill that many may not have played?

And if it is really that good, how come no one told me to leave the Bandon Resort when I asked a few weeks ago? :)
Logged

Jonathan Cummings

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #58 on: November 30, 2009, 05:28:07 PM »
Accurate comments Kalen - you're obviously familiar with statistics.

The raw list is unusable for this ranking exercise.  It is statistically unstable.  A course ranking with low samples could potentially shift wildly with just one more added vote.  Hard to compare just such a course against a stable high sampled course.

Ian’s first list with 10 or more votes presented is marginally useable.  

Statisticians like 30 or more votes for a normally distributed set of numbers (think Bell Curve) before they are generally comfortable calling the numbers converged (stable).  Statisticians are so uncomfortable with sample populations sets of less than 30 that they invented little tricks to "adjust" for small populations (called small population corrections).  

Our votes for any given course are excellent examples of a normally distributed set of numbers - plot a histogram for any course with more than 30 or so votes and damn near every one of them resembles an expected Bell Curve.  

Ian had 177 raters participate generating 8404 votes over 412 courses.  One quarter of the courses were thrown out because they had less than 10 votes.  If you applied the stricter 30-vote minimum criteria – 3/4s of the courses would have been tossed.

For a course database of this size (412) Ian would need something in the neighborhood of 20,000-30,000 more votes, or a couple three hundred more raters, to generate a statistically converged list of 30 or more samples for all 412 courses.

Ian's exercise falls way short of this.  But his results are surprisingly good (no real Oh-my-Gods).

The second list is scientifically far more defendable than the first, especially in light of the low number of samples.

JC
Logged

tlavin

Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #59 on: November 30, 2009, 06:05:08 PM »
Quote from: Bill Brightly on November 30, 2009, 05:21:45 PM
Is the Sheep Ranch THAT good? I've never played there, so I am curious. I know it gets a lot of love here on GCA, is the rating slanted in its favor because it is a GCA darling, ahead of courses like Ridgewood and Oak Hill that many may not have played?

And if it is really that good, how come no one told me to leave the Bandon Resort when I asked a few weeks ago? :)

No, it's not that great, it's just a great experience.
Logged

Richard Choi

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #60 on: November 30, 2009, 06:08:16 PM »
Is it possible to have the entire list (at least that are statistically relevant)? I would love to break it down for Top 100 US and Top 100 public.

A great list BTW!
Logged

Ian_L

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #61 on: November 30, 2009, 06:17:42 PM »
Kalen:
Rustic Canyon ranks around #175 in both polls, coming in at 6.8 .  I would have expected it a little higher.

Sean L:
I recommended that you only vote on a course that you had played or were otherwise VERY familiar with (caddied for example).  I suggested not voting on a course because you walked it at a tournament or saw it on TV (because in my opinion that is not even close to a substitute for playing it), however others disagreed.  I am sure a few of those votes came from people who have not actually played the course.

Tom D:
Good point, I'll have to think about that a bit more.  My brain still tells me that the 100th course should average out to 8.  This list is telling us that on average, GCA members think there are only about 50 courses in the world that deserve an "8" or higher.

JSPayne (sorry, can't remember your first name):
The highest number of courses played by one rater was 296(!).

Richard:
Working on that, however I'm not sure what format to put it in (it's currently in Excel).  One option would be to upload the file somewhere for people to download, although I was hoping for something that would be easier to view.
Logged

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #62 on: November 30, 2009, 06:24:49 PM »
Ian,

You can leave it as is and just use this for anyone who wants it.

Go to http://www.mediafire.com/

1)  Create a user name...its really quick only 6 feilds.
2)  Upload the xls.
3)  Paste the link on here and people can go straight to it and grab it.

Simple as that!!
Logged

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #63 on: November 30, 2009, 06:42:23 PM »
Ian,

Thanks, that is what I would have guessed....
Logged

Kyle Harris

Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #64 on: November 30, 2009, 06:47:03 PM »
With all the ties... I'd like to see a list that finally realizes there are probably 300 courses worthy of "Top 100" status.
Logged

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #65 on: November 30, 2009, 07:34:12 PM »
 Yes, Kyle! I would be more interested in a list down to some score. If it is 300 or 500 doesn't matter.
Logged
AKA Mayday

RSLivingston_III

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #66 on: November 30, 2009, 08:44:52 PM »
These lists have some amazing info in them. Who would have thought TOC would have had the most votes? As much grousing and whining about Cruden Bay as there has been, I was almost surprised it made the list let alone came in as high as it did.
Logged
"You need to start with the hickories as I truly believe it is hard to get inside the mind of the great architects from days gone by if one doesn't have any sense of how the equipment played way back when!"  
       Our Fearless Leader

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #67 on: November 30, 2009, 11:40:28 PM »
To me, the first question mark is The Country Club.  Really, the Reesification is that good???

Yale? Has it been fully restored yet?

Paraparaumu Beach?  Is it on the same level as Birkdale or Sebonack?

Kingsbarns this low? Western Gailes right above it?

Can someone explain the case for Old Town Club?  Royal West Norfolk?  Who even designed this course?

Franklin Hills Country Club?  Can someone explain the virtues?

How about the following courses for top 100?  Can anyone make a case for them.....

Erin Hills
Colorado GC
Not a single Fazio?  For real???
Kennemer
Addington
French Creek
Suttons Bay
Wolf Run
Fancourt Links
Boston Golf Club
Mayacama
Bulls Bay

St. Andrews Beach NLE RIP

Logged
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #68 on: December 01, 2009, 12:13:19 AM »
Dugger,

Wasn't the latest news that they had found a way to re-open St. Andrews Beach?
Logged
"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: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #69 on: December 01, 2009, 01:08:18 AM »
I would love it if the Maxim Hot 100 showed the hi/lo and standard deviation grades.  The thought of the most beautiful women in the world being analyzed like this is funny to me.  Who gave Jordanna Brewster a 4?!  Seriously!  And how can Brittany Daniel have an SD of 1.3...not everyone agrees she's babelicious?

Not a single Girl Next Door or Baywatch girl?  For real?
Logged

Kevin Pallier

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #70 on: December 01, 2009, 06:53:13 AM »
No surprises for mine on GCA with a significant "bias" towards US based courses
Logged

Paul_Turner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #71 on: December 01, 2009, 09:06:00 AM »
Quote from: Kevin Pallier on December 01, 2009, 06:53:13 AM
No surprises for mine on GCA with a significant "bias" towards US based courses

Definitely a pretty big bias but I guess not surprising.

Continental Europe didn't fare too well!
Logged
can't get to heaven with a three chord song

Cristian

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #72 on: December 01, 2009, 09:21:02 AM »
Definitely a pretty big bias but I guess not surprising.

Continental Europe didn't fare too well!

Morfontaine and St Germain scored high enough but did not have enough ratings...

« Last Edit: December 01, 2009, 09:34:24 AM by Cristian Willaert »
Logged

Cristian

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #73 on: December 01, 2009, 09:42:41 AM »
Quote from: Tom_Doak on November 30, 2009, 02:35:42 PM
Quote from: Ian_Linford on November 30, 2009, 01:39:51 PM
One more interesting point:
I believe at the beginning of this project Tom D suggested that a vote of 8 or higher is essentially a vote for a Top 100 course.  He appeared concerned that voters without experience would vote too many courses too high.  Interestingly, the 100th course on both lists is rated at only 7.4, and there are only 49 courses that received an 8.0 or higher rating in the "raw" rankings.  Any thoughts on this?

Ian:

That is the way it's supposed to work.  If giving a course an '8' means you think it's a top 100 course and giving it a '7' means you don't think it is, quite, than an average of 7.5 means half the panelists thought it should make the list and half didn't, and that's what it should take to just barely make the top 100.

The list of courses that had good votes but less than ten of them looks about right, too.  Too bad so few have played Hirono and Kawana and Morfontaine.  The only course I was surprised to see there was St. Germain, which had hardly any support for the GOLF Magazine list back when I ran it.

St Germain is a really nice course, but there are several better courses in continental europe; apart from Morfontaine Fontainebleau in France, Royal Zoute, Ravenstein (Belgium), Haagsche, Kennemer, De Pan (Netherlands) to name a few. Maintenance standards in Continental Europe usually are not on a par with those of courses in the UK or US, which I think hurts the ratings of these designs as well.

Logged

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: G.C.A. UNOFFICIAL Top 100 Released
« Reply #74 on: December 01, 2009, 12:25:45 PM »
Christian:

I'll see as many as half the courses you listed in the next week or ten days.  But I would be surprised if I think many of them should qualify for the top 100.  Of course, I'm just a biased American -- though a pretty well-traveled one.  I was one of the four guys voting in favor of Hirono, Kawana and Morfontaine, after all.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back