Golf Digest on NYC newsstands with Top 100

[Kalen Braley]

I'm guessing Wine Valley is too new to be included in this list as well.

Having played all 3, I would rank them like this:

1)  Wine Valley
2)  Gozzer Ranch
3)  Black Rock

And thats no knock on Black Rock because its a terrific course in my opinion and worthy of every last bit of praise it gets. It really just speaks to how good Wine Valley and Gozzer actually are.

[Matt_Ward]

Sean:

With all due respect -- you are clueless on this topic. Let me try to help you out if I can.

GD has a considerable reputation earned from years ago. With each passing ratings it's become obvious that so much is being wasted in that area -- because the outcomes are from close -- but now laughable.

Rock Creek, Kingsley and I might add a place like Black Mesa would easily be within my personal top 100. GD has created too many bureaucratic hurdles -- it's become quite silly frankly. We live in a real time world now -- GD believes that having more and more raters will ensure better overall coverage -- in fact, just the opposite has happened.

Sean, you asked about how can room be made available for newer courses? Simple. There's plenty of deadwood now present -- check out Baltusrol Lower and Sahalee -- two great examples. The former has made its presence stick because it has hosted numerous USGA Championships -- have Nicklaus win two Opens there helps -- but the overall architecture, in my mind, is not present. Check out what Whitten has said about the course from years back. They've added considerable distance but it still doesn't shine. Sahalee also gained from national events played there. Digest needs to re-evaulate its overall process -- the end results are now looked at with more of a laugh then a true appreciation for really understanding greatness in my mind.

Last item -- in a viral world as we have today -- you can get even better info with far less raters. My sources help me and I do likewise. It can be done.

[Matt_Ward]

JMEvensky, Pat Mucci,

One can have a split panel -- you can have state or regional raters and they would do that element exclusively. Franklly, I would say 90% of the raters now are regional in focus. A truly national panel can be made and someone like Ron Whitten would know just who should be there.

There's nothing wrong with homers provided people can't rate their own course(s) in their backyards.

GD's big problem is that the national results are truly lacking behind what is really obvious to many of us who are a good bit more in the know.

Without a Rock Creek and Kingsley in a top 100 USA listing -- you have a very flawed result. I can name other defiencies as well too.

[Sean Leary]

Sean:

With all due respect -- you are clueless on this topic. Let me try to help you out if I can.

GD has a considerable reputation earned from years ago. With each passing ratings it's become obvious that so much is being wasted in that area -- because the outcomes are from close -- but now laughable.

Rock Creek, Kingsley and I might add a place like Black Mesa would easily be within my personal top 100. GD has created too many bureaucratic hurdles -- it's become quite silly frankly. We live in a real time world now -- GD believes that having more and more raters will ensure better overall coverage -- in fact, just the opposite has happened.

Sean, you asked about how can room be made available for newer courses? Simple. There's plenty of deadwood now present -- check out Baltusrol Lower and Sahalee -- two great examples. The former has made its presence stick because it has hosted numerous USGA Championships -- have Nicklaus win two Opens there helps -- but the overall architecture, in my mind, is not present. Check out what Whitten has said about the course from years back. They've added considerable distance but it still doesn't shine. Sahalee also gained from national events played there. Digest needs to re-evaulate its overall process -- the end results are now looked at with more of a laugh then a true appreciation for really understanding greatness in my mind.

Last item -- in a viral world as we have today -- you can get even better info with far less raters. My sources help me and I do likewise. It can be done.

Matt, with all due respect you continue to talk out of your ass like yours is the only opinion that matters. Are you sure Rock Creek got enough raters? Did GD get worse because you are no longer on their panel? ? Can you get off the Black Mesa bandwagon one time? I thought you weren't marketing for them anymore. 

I could not agree more about Sahalee and there are others as well that seemingly "should" not be on the list. But there are plenty of other courses at the same level as any course that you pitch for that don't make it either. So the list is not a joke because they have a couple of courses that YOU or I deem unworthy. All rating panels are flawed, and that is OK. Matt Wards rating is not the end all be all.The point is that NO LIST IS PERFECT!!

Explain how the viral world gets you better info with less raters. I don't understand that, but clearly I am clueless so forgive me.

[Matt_Ward]

Sean:

Talk "out of my ass" -- guess again brother.

Sean, take a chill -- never said there is a perfect ratings. But the ones coming out now are big time flawed in my mind. Hey, I could give a crap whether you think my opinion matters or not. I'm just sharing some info based on my experiences -- but what the hell, I know squat in your mind.

I'll take my opinion against most here or elsewhere -- if you think I'm all wet in terms of places like Rock Creek, Kingsley and even Black Mesa please have the line start somewhere and let me see all of those who see me as being out of touch with those choices and the fact that plenty of old time dinosaur courses are still being rated when they should have been given the heave ho a few years back. By the way I don't market Black Mesa -- I let those who have played it speak for what it provides. Maybe you should take the cotton out of your ears and listen closely -- people like Jim Franklin and Andy T have weighed in with their comments. I guess they're all wet too. I respect their comments because they take the time to sample what is out there. Do you?

Who gives a flying freak about rater visits? It's a joke when people think you need 45+ people to weigh in with the obvious. Too much of the GD ratings are locked in stone with so many old time regulars.

Let me help you again -- in today's viral world the info passed is that much faster -- especially among people who really know golf. I make it a point to check with my sources before I even remotely leave the couch of my home. I trust these sources far more than what I see with GD ratings and what they produce now.

You say there are "plenty of others" -- sure, there are a few maybes -- but I can tell you a truly constituted national panel -- not some sort of regional or state one you see today -- can do a better job. No one is going to have a 100% foolproof listing but consensus findings are bogus at best -- one can have a smaller number of people who travel far more and play a good deal more. These people exist -- I communicate with plenty of them and until most recently I was traveling a good bit to see all the key contenders. You think that's bluster -- not at all.

Sean, I thought you were a bright guy. Someone who can appreciate and respect the take of others who don't just talk the talk but walk the walk. No ratings is ever perfect but what GD is doing now only harms their overall brand and credibility because fewer and fewer people see what they provide as being relevant.

[Greg Tallman]

Sean:

Talk "out of my ass" -- guess again brother.

Sean, take a chill -- never said there is a perfect ratings. But the ones coming out now are big time flawed in my mind. Hey, I could give a crap whether you think my opinion matters or not. I'm just sharing some info based on my experiences -- but what the hell, I know squat in your mind.

I'll take my opinion against most here or elsewhere -- if you think I'm all wet in terms of places like Rock Creek, Kingsley and even Black Mesa please have the line start somewhere and let me see all of those who see me as being out of touch with those choices and the fact that plenty of old time dinosaur courses are still being rated when they should have been given the heave ho a few years back. By the way I don't market Black Mesa -- I let those who have played it speak for what it provides. Maybe you should take the cotton out of your ears and listen closely -- people like Jim Franklin and Andy T have weighed in with their comments. I guess they're all wet too. I respect their comments because they take the time to sample what is out there. Do you?

Who gives a flying freak about rater visits? It's a joke when people think you need 45+ people to weigh in with the obvious. Too much of the GD ratings are locked in stone with so many old time regulars.

Let me help you again -- in today's viral world the info passed is that much faster -- especially among people who really know golf. I make it a point to check with my sources before I even remotely leave the couch of my home. I trust these sources far more than what I see with GD ratings and what they produce now.

You say there are "plenty of others" -- sure, there are a few maybes -- but I can tell you a truly constituted national panel -- not some sort of regional or state one you see today -- can do a better job. No one is going to have a 100% foolproof listing but consensus findings are bogus at best -- one can have a smaller number of people who travel far more and play a good deal more. These people exist -- I communicate with plenty of them and until most recently I was traveling a good bit to see all the key contenders. You think that's bluster -- not at all.

Sean, I thought you were a bright guy. Someone who can appreciate and respect the take of others who don't just talk the talk but walk the walk. No ratings is ever perfect but what GD is doing now only harms their overall brand and credibility because fewer and fewer people see what they provide as being relevant.

Good gracious Matt

[Matt_Ward]

Greg:

I get insulted that my take is all wet and I'm supposed to say what ?

I have said that places such as Rock Creek, Kingsley and even Black Mesa are worthy places that are simply bypassed for reasons that make no sense. I have watched the ratings process closely over the years and just weighed in with my personal feelings.

Ignore whatever you please.

[Garland Bayley]

oops

[Sean Leary]

Matt,

Two questions.

One, do you know if Rock Creek didn't get enough raters? I really don't know but you keep intimating that it didn't make it on scores, which may be true but I don't know.

Two, is the GOLF Mag rating your preferred one at this point? It seems like it should be.

Other than that we get your point. Your favorites should be in and non favorites should be out.  If that isn't the case then the ranking is useless.

Got it.

[Adam Clayman]

The Alotian has made the choice to allow Digest while turning away Golfweek raters. It has thrown the world out of balance in predictable directions. It is not the only course that has taken this route.
[/quote

John, Do you know of someone who promotes themselves as a person who knows how to manipulate the system?

Charging a club a fee to not only get the right number of raters but the "right raters" to see their course and rank it highly?

I don't know of one, but I suspect they are out there.

 The precipitous drops, that always seem to follow a "hot new course" is the only reason I ask. And, that you seem to have and know so much inside info.

[John Kavanaugh]

Adam,

Yes there are people who promote themselves as a person who knows how to manipulate the system.  I may have even been guilty of that myself.  As with all things in life, people are paid.

[Matt_Ward]

Sean:

You are a very bnight guy - I assume you agree so if I'm wrong please let me know.

I'vve been around the block just a tad over the years -- understand the ratings process and realize it's all about opinions. I would hope the people who have such a big time brand name like GD -- would really step back and see what is now holding back their esteemed ratings.

People can disagree and that's fine but show some real insights and some real wherewithal to get out there and play the key courses in a timely manner. Rock Creek is a cinch top 100 course in my mind -- whether there is enough raters or some such other bureaucratic imposed requirement is just so silly.

Magazines now exist in a "real time" world -- years back a long lead publication could easily have a time lag between the time course opened and when it met the base minimum of raters needed. GD has added tons of raters and frankly the overall coverage from all these people is far less than what any sane or logical person should expect -- and I am speaking about its devoted readers who have long respected the brand name of GD --- with each succeeding ratings that brand name is diminishing.

I would trust someone like yourself would understand that. Forgive me if my assumption is a major leap on my part.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I totally agree that no list is perfect...but when a nice course like The Alotian comes straight in at #14...it leaves one to wonder just how much politicking is really involved, and a magazine's crediblity comes into serious question....
Very "connected" membership and all that !!
Again a good course but not worthy of a top 20 place IMO

[John Kavanaugh]

I totally agree that no list is perfect...but when a nice course like The Alotian comes straight in at #14...it leaves one to wonder just how much politicking is really involved, and a magazine's crediblity comes into serious question....
Very "connected" membership and all that !!
Again a good course but not worthy of a top 20 place at all.

Michael,

I don't understand why you are so angry.  Did you at anytime while on site tell them you were a Golfweek rater?  Did your host ask you not to rate the course?  Knowing how you love practice areas, how did that impress you?

[Niall Hay]

While the Golf Magazine list more accurately reflects my personal preferences (I have played all of the GD Top 100 courses since the 1995 list), the Golf Digest Top 100 list for 2011 is several strides further in the right direction and a much improved list!

First of all, Friar's Head finally debuting in a favorable slot is great news and long overdue.  While my idols Jimmy Kidd (who left the club late last year) and Kenny Baskt don't care about the ratings, it is important that the many readers of GD realize that great architecture doesn't need to rely upon gimmicks (tee boxes on top of cliffs that require a 5 minute cartball drive to access) or professional golf tournaments to be recongized as such.  This leaves my beloved Myopia Hunt which I feel is World Top 50 course as my new personal best "left out" candidate to lobby other panelists to try to experience.  What other course in the US has 7 greens that a single digit player can fairly easily putt off the green into lurking bunker with many semi blind (but only to those without any imagination) shots and other cool quirky features?

Secondly, the inclusions of Ballyeal, Boston Golf, Kapalua Plantation, and Old Sandwich are deserving new entrants.  Hopefully Black Mesa, Old Mac, the Dormie Club, Chambers Bay, Gozzer Ranch, Prairie Club Dunes and perhaps Martis Camp will be 2013 new course additions too. Based upon Jim Franklin and Darius Oliver's Planet Golf recommendations, Rock Creek is my US top target for this fall.

Thirdly, the Top 10 is the best I have ever seen in a GD list although I would substitue Friar's Head for Winged Foot.  The inclusions of both Sand Hiils and the National (my favorite course...Bill Coore told me in so many words it might be his "most admired" course too) make the GD Top 10 pretty solid now.

Fourthly (is that a real word?), the big jumps forward for both Riviera (despite the 8th hole fiasco) and Bandon Trails are favorable signs that perhaps the Da Vinci Code (courses that are difficult to decipher in one sitting) such as Black Mesa and Kingsley will make the list with time...it should be noted that Kingsley made a big jump forward in the Michigan rankings.

As for my personal disagreements, my number one exception would be the Alotian Club at #14.  The Alotaian Club is set in a postcard setting high above a shimmering lake.  The service is unsurpassed with the Head Club Golfing Professional and the Caddie Master (Ben Crenshaw's caddie) meeting visitors at the club entrance with jackets on to ensure a warm welcome to the club.  The chocolate milkshakes are straight from Castle Pines and Whisper Rock...a little over the top is the driving range where they offer different types of ball brands for the warm up (I'm hitting a few range balls not selecting a wine).

It should also be pointed that the Alotian has many fine individual holes and that the greensite are more interesting (seemingly more random in their contouring) than most of the Fazio's team work.  However, it should also be mentioned that all the greens are all approximately the same size in terms of square feet, one size fits all.  Remember when Fazio used to build greens of different sizes including 20 yard deep greens at Shadow Creek (#17), Black Diamond and Wade Hampton, what happened to that guy?

The Alotian is patterned after Augusta National and has succeeded in so many ways including the charming cabins (did not stay in one of them) EXCEPT the most important aspect of AN, the routing.  As someone who has had the good fortune of playing 6 rounds at AN and will visit again for 3 more rounds after the Masters this year, the brilliant Mackenzie/Bobby Jones routing features tees often only a few paces from the prior green.  It is an inspired routing (that's why Coore, Doak, etc. spend months walking properties trying to determine the best possible routing) and the result is that the AN experience flows harmoniously thru the round.

The Alotian features 15 miles of cart paths and I believe the Head Pro told me that noone has ever walked the course...how can this be a celebration of Augusta National and the spiriti of golf?

Bottom line, I have played 25 Tom Fazio courses that are significantly better than the Alotian and in my mind it is vastly overrated along with Black Rock, Canyata, Rich Harvest Links and the Prince course at Princeville as wonderfully scenic, high slope rating and vapid cartball venues that are not deserving of another visit.  I predict that in 20 years from now 1 and maybe 2 of these courses will be covered in weeds.  My guess is that in 20 years the rankings will see significant changes and that ratings fans will wonder why these courses were ever included in the first place much like the Arcadian Dunes, CC of North Carolina, Concord Monster,  Greenlefe etc. of another era.

But that's what make rankings fun, everyone has their own opinion!

p.s. I drove by Apache Stronghold late in the day last week and they are filling in some of the bunkers to curb costs.

Awesome post. 

[Anton]

Very politically driven ratings.  Alotian owner Warren Stephens father was Jack Stephens Chairman at Augusta.  I'm surprised Alotian didnt crack the Top 10.    

The Top 10 is solid (except for ANGC and Winged Foot).  I suspect that the Trump Courses will begin to rise more and more with Golf Digest raters because of his bid for president.  Next rating will see:

1. Trump Bedminster (Old)
2. Trump Palm Beach
3. Trump Philly
4. Trump Bedminster (New)
5. Alotian Club
6. Augusta
7. Trump California
8. Trump Westchester
9. Trump Washington
10. Trump Hudson

Just a future prediction.  HAHAHA!
I am only joking of course. 

[Brad Tufts]

I just don't know why the GD ratings are looked upon by those interested as a personal insult to one's personal preferences.  Each and every one of us will have favorites that will not make the list, favorites we think should be higher, and courses that make the list that we disagree with as a "top 100 course."  

As Walter Sobchek once said, "this isn't Nam, there are rules."  Every panel or set or ratings has a set of rules.  For Golf Digest, this involves a short waiting period for a new course, then a minimum # of ratings to make the state rankings, and a higher minimum # or ratings to make the Top 100.  Golfweek has no waiting period, and some sort of minimum # of ratings.  Not sure what Golf magazine does rule-wise, but their list doesn't seem to change as much.  Despite "living in a viral world" (as named 9 times in the last two pages of this thread), courses should still have a short waiting period so the buzz can wear off and they can be compared to the others.

The bottom line is that the three major ratings have three different procedures that present three different versions of the US top 100, with 50 or 60 overlaps.  Personally, I think the most important aspect of all three (on the consumer's end) is to stimulate discussion about golf and architecture.  How can a rating system that makes us talk more be that horrible?

Some architecture-interested folks identify with the GD way of doing things, some with the GW way, and some trust the "experts and industry leaders" associated with the Golf Mag list.  Personally, my preference trends towards GD as it picks only 100, compares courses built recently with those built a long time ago, and has a comprehensive list of categories that gets to the core of course quality.  I find the Golfweek method a bit too all-inclusive for my tastes, and as for Golf Mag, it is tough for me to understand how some of their panelists (like Justin Rose or Adam Scott or the architects that spend their time on their own projects in non-lean years) are able to get to enough courses to see for themselves what is out there.  All of that being said, it's just my opinion.

I'm sure Kingsley and RCCC are worthy (I haven't been to either yet), but once they get enough ratings, or they have an 8-year period for their potential ratings to accumulate, we will see where they fall.  I don't know why we would jump off the deep end in 2011 because they are not on there, as they haven't been around for that long.

Just a few things that came to mind.

[Tony Weiler]

While the Golf Magazine list more accurately reflects my personal preferences (I have played all of the GD Top 100 courses since the 1995 list), the Golf Digest Top 100 list for 2011 is several strides further in the right direction and a much improved list!

First of all, Friar's Head finally debuting in a favorable slot is great news and long overdue.  While my idols Jimmy Kidd (who left the club late last year) and Kenny Baskt don't care about the ratings, it is important that the many readers of GD realize that great architecture doesn't need to rely upon gimmicks (tee boxes on top of cliffs that require a 5 minute cartball drive to access) or professional golf tournaments to be recongized as such.  This leaves my beloved Myopia Hunt which I feel is World Top 50 course as my new personal best "left out" candidate to lobby other panelists to try to experience.  What other course in the US has 7 greens that a single digit player can fairly easily putt off the green into lurking bunker with many semi blind (but only to those without any imagination) shots and other cool quirky features?

Secondly, the inclusions of Ballyeal, Boston Golf, Kapalua Plantation, and Old Sandwich are deserving new entrants.  Hopefully Black Mesa, Old Mac, the Dormie Club, Chambers Bay, Gozzer Ranch, Prairie Club Dunes and perhaps Martis Camp will be 2013 new course additions too. Based upon Jim Franklin and Darius Oliver's Planet Golf recommendations, Rock Creek is my US top target for this fall.

Thirdly, the Top 10 is the best I have ever seen in a GD list although I would substitue Friar's Head for Winged Foot.  The inclusions of both Sand Hiils and the National (my favorite course...Bill Coore told me in so many words it might be his "most admired" course too) make the GD Top 10 pretty solid now.

Fourthly (is that a real word?), the big jumps forward for both Riviera (despite the 8th hole fiasco) and Bandon Trails are favorable signs that perhaps the Da Vinci Code (courses that are difficult to decipher in one sitting) such as Black Mesa and Kingsley will make the list with time...it should be noted that Kingsley made a big jump forward in the Michigan rankings.

As for my personal disagreements, my number one exception would be the Alotian Club at #14.  The Alotaian Club is set in a postcard setting high above a shimmering lake.  The service is unsurpassed with the Head Club Golfing Professional and the Caddie Master (Ben Crenshaw's caddie) meeting visitors at the club entrance with jackets on to ensure a warm welcome to the club.  The chocolate milkshakes are straight from Castle Pines and Whisper Rock...a little over the top is the driving range where they offer different types of ball brands for the warm up (I'm hitting a few range balls not selecting a wine).

It should also be pointed that the Alotian has many fine individual holes and that the greensite are more interesting (seemingly more random in their contouring) than most of the Fazio's team work.  However, it should also be mentioned that all the greens are all approximately the same size in terms of square feet, one size fits all.  Remember when Fazio used to build greens of different sizes including 20 yard deep greens at Shadow Creek (#17), Black Diamond and Wade Hampton, what happened to that guy?

The Alotian is patterned after Augusta National and has succeeded in so many ways including the charming cabins (did not stay in one of them) EXCEPT the most important aspect of AN, the routing.  As someone who has had the good fortune of playing 6 rounds at AN and will visit again for 3 more rounds after the Masters this year, the brilliant Mackenzie/Bobby Jones routing features tees often only a few paces from the prior green.  It is an inspired routing (that's why Coore, Doak, etc. spend months walking properties trying to determine the best possible routing) and the result is that the AN experience flows harmoniously thru the round.

The Alotian features 15 miles of cart paths and I believe the Head Pro told me that noone has ever walked the course...how can this be a celebration of Augusta National and the spiriti of golf?

Bottom line, I have played 25 Tom Fazio courses that are significantly better than the Alotian and in my mind it is vastly overrated along with Black Rock, Canyata, Rich Harvest Links and the Prince course at Princeville as wonderfully scenic, high slope rating and vapid cartball venues that are not deserving of another visit.  I predict that in 20 years from now 1 and maybe 2 of these courses will be covered in weeds.  My guess is that in 20 years the rankings will see significant changes and that ratings fans will wonder why these courses were ever included in the first place much like the Arcadian Dunes, CC of North Carolina, Concord Monster,  Greenlefe etc. of another era.

But that's what make rankings fun, everyone has their own opinion!

p.s. I drove by Apache Stronghold late in the day last week and they are filling in some of the bunkers to curb costs.

Great post, Bill.  Why I love GCA.com

[John Kavanaugh]

Very politically driven ratings.  Alotian owner Warren Stephens father was Jack Stephens Chairman at Augusta.  I'm surprised Alotian didnt crack the Top 10.    

Perhaps we have a clue why the Alotian blackballs Golfweek raters.

[Brad LeClair]

No new information here but they posted a slideshow of the top 20 courses and will post the full Top 100 online on April 5th.

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-courses/2011-05/photos-100-greatest-top-20#slide=1

[JR Potts]

The only thing I've taken from this thread is that Matt Ward is very mean sometimes, John Kavanaugh still makes me laugh, all of the "ratings" are meaningless and Bill Schulz needs to become my new best friend.

[Sean Leary]

From clueless to bright in 3 posts, I must have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Well Matt, I think you sort of answered my first question and still didn't answer my second question but whatever. Your issue is with the process and how they come up with ratings which you see as anachronistic. Fine. I see it as one way to get a list that remains not perfect but worthy.

We can move on.

[Matt_Ward]

Ryan:

Not mean -- just trying to help people understand that others have walked plenty of miles before they have chimed in with their comments.

I don't bite.

Sean:

I give you that compliment because frankly in your earlier posts you were truly lost and simply not making much sense or paying heed to what some folks with considerable experience (hint / hint) have kindly provided.

I answered your questions -- not to YOUR satisfaction but to mine.

Sean -- try to realize that I understand completely that a subjective exercise can never be 100% but what you fail to acknowledge that what I have said concerning improvements to the process would make such findings have more credibility than what Digest lists now.

Simple as that.

[Mike Hendren]

Regarding The Alotian Club:

http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/alotian/

Described in the article as "carts-only."

Don't try to describe a Kiss Concert if you've never seen it.
Don't ever forget that you just might wind up being wrong.
And I hope Anita Bryant never ever does one of my songs.
- Jimmy Buffet

[Tom_Doak]

Most of these arguments come back to people's definition of a great course.

GOLF DIGEST is the only ranking which uses a strict definition, with points for aesthetics, for conditioning, for "resistance to scoring", and even for tradition and ambiance [though I believe they've made the latter category less important in recent years; it used to be a huge fudge factor].  If you don't agree with their definition [which I don't], or if you believe that greatness in a golf course is somehow beyond ticking boxes and scoring points [as I do], then you should not expect to agree with their results, and should not get too worked up about whatever they publish.

I think it's a shame that such a prominent golf publication has such a bad system for defining what a great course is, but they are not likely to listen to me, since I used to work for a different publication and since their results affect my business.  I would encourage those others of you who disagree with their results (and therefore their system] to write in with suggestions to IMPROVE THEIR DEFINITION, instead of wasting your breath arguing about the results pointlessly, as everyone else does.