[Trey Kemp]

Here is a link to the annual Texas Golf Section in the Dallas Morning News.  There are some pretty interesting articles and of course the rankings. 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/golf/texasgolf2010/vitindex.html

[Jud_T]

Austin Golf Club #16?, hard to believe.....

[K. Krahenbuhl]

Has anyone played PT since it reopened?

[Anthony_Nysse]

Austin Golf Club #16?, hard to believe.....

Not suprised at all. No one ever plays there.

[Sam Morrow]

Nobody consulted me on any of these rankings so I say pooey.

[John Handley]

For those of you who have knowledge about Texas golf course, I would like to hear your thoughts, not only on the rankings but on the Texas Golf section of The Dallas Morning News.

[Sam Morrow]

For those of you who have knowledge about Texas golf course, I would like to hear your thoughts, not only on the rankings but on the Texas Golf section of The Dallas Morning News.

Background, I am in the process of relocating from San Francisco to Dallas.  I am the Advertising Director, Sports at The Dallas Morning News. Having held similar positions at Sports Illustrated, GOLF Magazine and ESPN, I am looking to make improvements to our golf coverage.  I feel there is a great opportunity here and I would like your feedback. 

PM being sent.

[Phil_the_Author]

Can anyone explain how the Rawls course went from #56 to being no longer in the top 100?

[Wyatt Halliday]

John,

Welcome to Texas. I have always thought the DMN golf annual was unique and interesting. I'm not sure of many other major papers with such rankings lists although I'm almost certain to be proven wrong. The problems I have with it are generally the same problems many on this board opine about from day to day. The rankings are done by the same many of the same people year after year, and it seems the collective opinion on what makes a course great fall on these criteria: How private a course is, how well conditioned it is, or how big, long and brawny it is. Our state has quite a few good courses and few great ones. Few courses of exceptional architectural merit have been built here in the last sixty years because of this prevailing attitude. Everyone wants the big name, the big courses, and the big budgets that are associated with them. There are many courses in Texas that I have a sentimental attachment to, and it has less to do with the architecture than any other factor.

What respect I had for this list was further diminished when Rawls was not even listed among the Top 100 in the state.

Best of luck to you in Dallas.

Cheers,
Wyatt

[Wyatt Halliday]

For those of you who have knowledge about Texas golf course, I would like to hear your thoughts, not only on the rankings but on the Texas Golf section of The Dallas Morning News.

Background, I am in the process of relocating from San Francisco to Dallas.  I am the Advertising Director, Sports at The Dallas Morning News. Having held similar positions at Sports Illustrated, GOLF Magazine and ESPN, I am looking to make improvements to our golf coverage.  I feel there is a great opportunity here and I would like your feedback. 

PM being sent.

Sam,

Why so serious? HMR made the Top 100 this year

[Sam Morrow]

For those of you who have knowledge about Texas golf course, I would like to hear your thoughts, not only on the rankings but on the Texas Golf section of The Dallas Morning News.

Background, I am in the process of relocating from San Francisco to Dallas.  I am the Advertising Director, Sports at The Dallas Morning News. Having held similar positions at Sports Illustrated, GOLF Magazine and ESPN, I am looking to make improvements to our golf coverage.  I feel there is a great opportunity here and I would like your feedback. 

PM being sent.

Sam,

Why so serious? HMR made the Top 100 this year

I think we should have been ranked higher but I am okay with that ranking. I do think that The Rawls being out of the Top 100 is laughable but that's just me.

[John Handley]

any thoughts on the list are appreciated.

[Sam Morrow]

I have not played the Rawls Course but would be curious too why it fell out of the top 100.  I would like to make recommendations to the Edit staff moving forward on ways to improve the rankings and the section.  I realize these types of things stir up the debate but I think the issue I have perosnally is that a majority of the voters do not even visit the course they are rating.  I would expect that is also why Austin Golf Club dropped so much in the rankings too.  there has to be a better way.

I know a lot of people on that panel and I know they don't get out much.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

I heard Justin Leonard talk about  Old American GC at The Tribute on XM Radio 146 this morning. Looks really good:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/golf/texasgolf2010/stories/030710dnspotxgolf-oldamerican.2d9c743.html

http://www.tdagolf.net/sites/courses/layout9.asp?id=853&page=48153

This might deserve a new thread when it opens.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have not played the Rawls Course but would be curious too why it fell out of the top 100.  I would like to make recommendations to the Edit staff moving forward on ways to improve the rankings and the section.  I realize these types of things stir up the debate but I think the issue I have perosnally is that a majority of the voters do not even visit the course they are rating.  I would expect that is also why Austin Golf Club dropped so much in the rankings too.  there has to be a better way.

John,

I am a dallas based gca and I am a DMN rater. (I didn't for many years, feeling there was a bit of conflict of interest. And, I still don't vote for my own courses, or intentionally rank them lower than I might otherwise. I don't think its necessarily that way for all the others in the golf biz that are also raters and also have conflict of interest.

I am not sure I agree with Sam's asssesment at all. Texans are by and large pretty avid golfers.

I participate and enjoy it, but realized that all the weaknesses of any rankng system are there.  As to Rawls, its still a manufactured golf course in a hostile setting.  While many here respect Mr. Doak and what he has done elsewhere, it is just possible that the ranking is justified given the varied topography of courses in the state, isn't it?  In other words, its a good sign that its not a top course just because its a Doak, or a lower ranking for Austin GC because its Crenshaw, is not a bad sign.

In short, Texans are rarely anyone's butt boy!

[Sam Morrow]

I have not played the Rawls Course but would be curious too why it fell out of the top 100.  I would like to make recommendations to the Edit staff moving forward on ways to improve the rankings and the section.  I realize these types of things stir up the debate but I think the issue I have perosnally is that a majority of the voters do not even visit the course they are rating.  I would expect that is also why Austin Golf Club dropped so much in the rankings too.  there has to be a better way.

John,

I am a dallas based gca and I am a DMN rater. (I didn't for many years, feeling there was a bit of conflict of interest. And, I still don't vote for my own courses, or intentionally rank them lower than I might otherwise. I don't think its necessarily that way for all the others in the golf biz that are also raters and also have conflict of interest.

I am not sure I agree with Sam's asssesment at all. Texans are by and large pretty avid golfers.

I participate and enjoy it, but realized that all the weaknesses of any rankng system are there.  As to Rawls, its still a manufactured golf course in a hostile setting.  While many here respect Mr. Doak and what he has done elsewhere, it is just possible that the ranking is justified given the varied topography of courses in the state, isn't it?  In other words, its a good sign that its not a top course just because its a Doak, or a lower ranking for Austin GC because its Crenshaw, is not a bad sign.

In short, Texans are rarely anyone's butt boy!

Jeff,

 I won't single anybody out but there are quite a few people on that list who don't play a lot of courses and don't see a lot of the courses, that is one of the problems anytime you have a state with as many courses as Texas.

[Bill_McBride]

I have not played the Rawls Course but would be curious too why it fell out of the top 100.  I would like to make recommendations to the Edit staff moving forward on ways to improve the rankings and the section.  I realize these types of things stir up the debate but I think the issue I have perosnally is that a majority of the voters do not even visit the course they are rating.  I would expect that is also why Austin Golf Club dropped so much in the rankings too.  there has to be a better way.

John,

I am a dallas based gca and I am a DMN rater. (I didn't for many years, feeling there was a bit of conflict of interest. And, I still don't vote for my own courses, or intentionally rank them lower than I might otherwise. I don't think its necessarily that way for all the others in the golf biz that are also raters and also have conflict of interest.

I am not sure I agree with Sam's asssesment at all. Texans are by and large pretty avid golfers.

I participate and enjoy it, but realized that all the weaknesses of any rankng system are there.  As to Rawls, its still a manufactured golf course in a hostile setting.  While many here respect Mr. Doak and what he has done elsewhere, it is just possible that the ranking is justified given the varied topography of courses in the state, isn't it?  In other words, its a good sign that its not a top course just because its a Doak, or a lower ranking for Austin GC because its Crenshaw, is not a bad sign.

In short, Texans are rarely anyone's butt boy!

Jeff,

 I won't single anybody out but there are quite a few people on that list who don't play a lot of courses and don't see a lot of the courses, that is one of the problems anytime you have a state with as many courses as Texas.

........or a state as spread out as Texas.  One reason for the Rawls course falling off has to be the answer to the musical question, "Who goes to Lubbock unless they have to?"  

Or as Mac Davis wrote and sang, "Happiness is Lubbock Texas In Your Rear View Mirror."

On another note, I cannot fathom the love among Texas raters for the Fazio Foothills course at Barton Creek.  It's behind the Fazio Canyons and the Crenshaw Cliffside course in my opinion, a bunch of mediocre holes shoehorned into an extremely awkward site.

[Sam Morrow]

I have not played the Rawls Course but would be curious too why it fell out of the top 100.  I would like to make recommendations to the Edit staff moving forward on ways to improve the rankings and the section.  I realize these types of things stir up the debate but I think the issue I have perosnally is that a majority of the voters do not even visit the course they are rating.  I would expect that is also why Austin Golf Club dropped so much in the rankings too.  there has to be a better way.

John,

I am a dallas based gca and I am a DMN rater. (I didn't for many years, feeling there was a bit of conflict of interest. And, I still don't vote for my own courses, or intentionally rank them lower than I might otherwise. I don't think its necessarily that way for all the others in the golf biz that are also raters and also have conflict of interest.

I am not sure I agree with Sam's asssesment at all. Texans are by and large pretty avid golfers.

I participate and enjoy it, but realized that all the weaknesses of any rankng system are there.  As to Rawls, its still a manufactured golf course in a hostile setting.  While many here respect Mr. Doak and what he has done elsewhere, it is just possible that the ranking is justified given the varied topography of courses in the state, isn't it?  In other words, its a good sign that its not a top course just because its a Doak, or a lower ranking for Austin GC because its Crenshaw, is not a bad sign.

In short, Texans are rarely anyone's butt boy!

Jeff,

 I won't single anybody out but there are quite a few people on that list who don't play a lot of courses and don't see a lot of the courses, that is one of the problems anytime you have a state with as many courses as Texas.

........or a state as spread out as Texas.  One reason for the Rawls course falling off has to be the answer to the musical question, "Who goes to Lubbock unless they to?"   

Or as Mac Davis wrote and sang, "Happiness is Lubbock Texas In Your Rear View Mirror."

On another note, I cannot fathom the love among Texas raters for the Fazio Foothills course at Barton Creek.  It's behind the Fazio Canyons and the Crenshaw Cliffside course in my opinion, a bunch of mediocre holes shoehorned into an extremely awkward site.

But come on Bill, Foothills is really pretty.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sam,

As I said, I am sure this panel has all the strengths and weaknesses of any other golf course rating panel. With me on it, how could it not?  

Like all panels, the DMN builds in some safeguards against "bad" voting.   My understanding is that the reason the Rawls Course is not in the Top 100 is that not enough panel members rated it this year........Its not like Lubbock is on the way to anywhere, ya know! The requirement for the Top 100 is that 25 percent of the panel members had to rate a course for it to be eligible. This year 100 panel members voted, so a course needed to be voted on by 25 panel members. Twenty-two voted for The Rawls Course, just short of what is necessary.  The Rawls Course made the top 50 courses open to the public because the standards are lower (20 percent).

You can disagree with the percentage of voters required, the rating system, the differences in categories, the voters, the concept, whatever, but DMN takes it seriously and that is their system. Sometimes these rues work in ways no one can imagine, I guess.

That said, I will take those 22 voters word for it over some guy on this web site who thinks that a Doak or Crenshaw course just HAS to be better than all but 99 other courses in Texas, even though he hasn't seen them OR the others.

In reality, I am sort of tired of all the rankings of all kinds from any source, and the endless discussion of them here.  They are what they are. I think its funny that so many rush to the typewriter to vent about this system or that, and almost always end up doing some kind of ranking themselves in response to some supposed unfair ranking.  Like the magazines and newspapers, they tweak the categories and criteria endlessly to get "just the right result".  I have just never been convinced that any one intelligentsia vote is more informed than a collection of them.

Of course, that is just me.  Have a good one, and if you want to join our little panel to "straighten us out" I will do my level best to get you on there!

[mike_beene]

Welcome to Dallas. An interesting thing over the years is that a number of the new courses go from very highly ranked at first and then freefall. The older seem to hold their position. I do think the list gives a good mix of old and new. I will say that the fastest way for us to get a capital call is to fall out of the top 50. We are safe this year but always on the bubble.

[Ben Sims]

Preach on brother Wyatt!

I've lived all over since I became a golfer 10 years ago.  And this list from the DMN confirms what I've long held as truth.  Texas is--per capita--the WORST public golf state I've ever lived in.  I have never lived anywhere that so blatantly advertises great golfing experiences to the public, only to find most are 5 hour slogs of golf.  I can't tell you how many times I've tried to buy a sleeve of balls (whatever the brand) at a course, only to find that they only sell balls with their course logo on them.  Seriously?  

At Newport Dunes:  Mango scented towels
At The Bandit:  Logo balls, militant starter enforcing 8 minute gaps--subsequent 5 1/2 hour round
At The Quarry:  Nike rep on the first tee handing out info
At La Cantera:  holes routed in such as way as to promote the return of mountain goats to South Texas

It's saying something when you have played all over the state and the best experience I've had to date was walking the renovated Brackenridge Park.  I'm dead serious when I say that the best Texas has to offer its public golfers are the quant and often fun 9 holers sprinkled in small towns.  

Sorry if I offend, but this top 100 is a joke.  Texas can do better.  

[Sam Morrow]

Sam,

As I said, I am sure this panel has all the strengths and weaknesses of any other golf course rating panel. With me on it, how could it not?  

Like all panels, the DMN builds in some safeguards against "bad" voting.   My understanding is that the reason the Rawls Course is not in the Top 100 is that not enough panel members rated it this year........Its not like Lubbock is on the way to anywhere, ya know! The requirement for the Top 100 is that 25 percent of the panel members had to rate a course for it to be eligible. This year 100 panel members voted, so a course needed to be voted on by 25 panel members. Twenty-two voted for The Rawls Course, just short of what is necessary.  The Rawls Course made the top 50 courses open to the public because the standards are lower (20 percent).

You can disagree with the percentage of voters required, the rating system, the differences in categories, the voters, the concept, whatever, but DMN takes it seriously and that is their system. Sometimes these rues work in ways no one can imagine, I guess.

That said, I will take those 22 voters word for it over some guy on this web site who thinks that a Doak or Crenshaw course just HAS to be better than all but 99 other courses in Texas, even though he hasn't seen them OR the others.

In reality, I am sort of tired of all the rankings of all kinds from any source, and the endless discussion of them here.  They are what they are. I think its funny that so many rush to the typewriter to vent about this system or that, and almost always end up doing some kind of ranking themselves in response to some supposed unfair ranking.  Like the magazines and newspapers, they tweak the categories and criteria endlessly to get "just the right result".  I have just never been convinced that any one intelligentsia vote is more informed than a collection of them.

Of course, that is just me.  Have a good one, and if you want to join our little panel to "straighten us out" I will do my level best to get you on there!

Jeff I don't need to be on that panel, I am biased and can be bought. My top 5 in state would be a combination of High Meadow Ranch, Ridgeview Ranch, Tangle Ridge, Weeks Park, and The Wilderness.

[Mark Molyneux]

For those of you who have knowledge about Texas golf course, I would like to hear your thoughts.... 

John-

For starters, let me say that I am a fan of old golf courses and Tillinghast designs in particular. I knew a little about Cedar Crest in Dallas from my reading before I traveled there. I was told that "... the course isn't in the best part of town." Wondering what that might mean, I drove to the course through some iffy housing but never felt like I was in trouble. Got to the course and I was very pleasantly surprised! The club dates from 1919 and it shut down for a bit following the great depression. Cedar Crest underwent a $3 million makeover about 5 or 6 years ago. It's a great mix of holes from the long opener to some delicate short fours. Playing conditions couldn't have been any better when I played there last in 2008. I enjoy being able to say that I've played a course that hosted a major as Cedar Crest did with the PGA back in the 1920s. A modest clubhouse with friendly staff. I'd recommend the course for the history and for the golf. It plays as long as 6500, sloped around 130-135, with a rating higher than the par of 71.

If you enjoy a more modern experience with more length, I really enjoyed Waterchase. Very scenic and challenging. It stretches to over 7300 yards with a rating of 74+ and a slope of just under 140. Plenty of real estate amd plenty of challenge. It was a Golf Digest new course of the year in 2001.

Both courses are very reasonably priced and I had no trouble getting out as a single even on weekends.

Enjoy Dallas but don't become a Cowboy fan... please!

[Ed Oden]

My thoughts should be taken with a HUGE grain of salt since I left Texas too long ago to have a meaningful perspective on the current state of affairs.  But I always felt the DMN rankings had the potential to be something really unique.  It is generated by a large, credible newspaper that, in theory, should (i) have the ability, resources and reputational interests to put out a quality product, (ii) be less beholden to industry forces than the major golf publications and (iii) far more in tune with the state's golf scene than the national magazines.  I am not aware of another list with comparable advantages.  However, I don't ever get the feeling they manage to capitalize on those advantages.  At the end of the day, it seems to me they fall victim to many of the same types of pitfalls as the other rankings.  Maybe its unreasonable for me to expect otherwise.  Yet it always seems like a bit of a missed opportunity to me.  Perhaps that has changed since I left.

Ed

[Mark Molyneux]

Can anyone explain how the Rawls course went from #56 to being no longer in the top 100?

I realize that Texas is a huge state with lots of golf courses but if they have 100 better than Tom Doak's Rawls Course, I'm shocked! Maybe they took the place to task for it's Spartan clubhouse? A double wide trailer set up doesn't exactly impress at the outset but the place was as close to real links golf as I've gotten without benefit of an ocean or an estuary nearby. When one of the regulars was 60 yards out on the first hole and he took out his putter, I knew I'd be hitting some rare shots to stay below the legendary Texas winds. I loved the par threes in particular. Turf conditions were exceptional but I think I expected as much with the University connection. The putting surfaces weren't tricked up but they were certainly daunting propositions if the approach shot wasn't close.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()