Golf Digest on NYC newsstands with Top 100

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

Actually Matt...not back pedalling at all.
If you read my posts carefully, I never criticised the course..quite the opposite..
When asked by Mike H to give my likes and dislikes I was quite specific in both...neither of which criticised the course JUST tHE #14 RATING.
My only dislkie was the non walkability of the facility, as stated in my "retraction" above.

I do not see or read any backpedalling, just a humble explanation of what I was trying to say, so that any friends I may have who are members ...remain friends....

Not a case of manning up at all.
I stand by everything I said..black balling or not!!!

[Kalen Braley]

Kelly,

I'm not sure where you got the impression that i'm the type who sticks his nose in the air at "lesser" golfers and thier tastes.  For anyone whose ever played with me or met me, they know that nothing could be further from what I am.  If anything I'm closer to the "average" golfer than one who is a golf "snob".  The vast majority of my rounds per year come on joe blow muni courses with a few occasional rounds on private and/or upscale courses.

As for me, I will play with any and all types of golfers.  In my hundreds of rounds I've played over the years I've only had one true bad experience (I was playing with 3 guys who were sharing two bags of clubs and none of them knew the 1st thing about anything related to golf).

That being said, I don't think it hurts to try to educate where we can on the "whys" of how a golf course is fun to play, and which ones are more desirable than others.  The fact remains that most don't know what it takes to get a golf course in ideal condition and anything I can learn here and transfer to others I play with is a net negative.

Anyway you slice it, it all starts by listening to the average consumer base and understanding what they want.

As Matt Ward alluded to earlier...if they want a beer, a cart, laughs and chuckles to forget about thier daily cares, and a "disneyland" experience.... then so be it.

[Brad Tufts]

Brad:

Thanks for disclosing -- but really since you have vested interest as a rater for GD it seems unikely you will say anything which could undercut that connection. Correct?

I don't have any "vested interest" in anything other than submitting the information as requested by the GD rating panel.  I'm happy to discuss the ins and the outs of the process, which is what we are currently doing.

Just to help me out -- what, in your own words, "qualifies" you to be a panelist?

Since I was about 10 or 12, I have purchased and read every book on golf course architecture I can get my hands on.  I wrote my senior history thesis at Middlebury on GCA in America during the Golden Age doing 6 months of research, mainly using my personal golf book library.  I've played 4 years of collegiate golf, and over 10 years of the highest-level state golf in Massachusetts, and through this I have been able to observe how good players strategize on a golf course, and been able to reconcile this with my own perception of golf course strategy.  I've been lucky enough to spend 10 years on the GD panel seeing some of the best golf courses this country has to offer, learning a great deal during my travels.  I also think participation in a discussion panel such as this one should almost be a prerequisite, just to get a national perspective on various great courses, and to see differing opinions on things, especially from those in the business.

I say all of this to answer your question, but as I said in my previous post, none of it makes me the best panelist that ever lived, nor makes my opinion the correct one.  There are plenty others who are equally if not more qualified than me, including every single person in the golf course architecture business who have hands-on experience, unlike myself.

I'm curious too if you don't mind...do you consider yourself qualified?  If so (I would guess most panelists do), how?


You are quick to point out Old Mac is "crazy-high" but you have never played it thus far. How do you reconcile taking a position when you have not played it? I can tell you this from my experiences for what they may be worth or not worth to you -- Old Macdonald is a top 100 course for me -- I can't say it's a #3 but it would certainly be among the elite 25-30 courses I have played.

You are correct that I have not played it, as I said.  I also said it "seems" high, which is taking no position at all.  "Seems" denotes that I am surprised, and am excited to someday see for myself.  Hopefully sooner rather than later!  

You also say GD recognizes the second tier courses in the state ratings. Why should WF/E be relegated to just that position when it has the deserved goods (my opinion mind you) to be a top 100 course?

I just mean that GW's system recognizes 50+ additional courses on the T100 Classic list.  GD's system handles those 50+ additional on the state lists, generally.  WF/E could be a T100 course, the numbers on the GD list may or may not have come out that way.  If it does not appear on the T100 coming out online on Tuesday, then no doubt it will be high (based on high opinions like yours) on the NY state list.

Edited once to add a couple things right after I posted it.

[Matt_Ward]

Brad:

Here's my point -- you have "vested interest" in remaining a panelist.

You missed my point on when I said having a vested interest. As a GD panelist it would be highly unlikely you would say anything critical of the process used by the magazine. Right?

Appreciate your detailed backgrounder but you did say "crazy high" on Old Macdonald -- even with the qualifier you presented initially.

How bout you wait till you play it before tagging the course in some form or fashion? Let me point out that I have played all of the Bandon courses and my expectation for Old Macdonald was very high -- the course exceeded that.

Thanks again for your answers ...

[M.W._Burrows]

So I take it that no one knows where Winged Foot East is then?  Does anyone actually have this silly magazine?

[Sean Leary]

So I take it that no one knows where Winged Foot East is then?  Does anyone actually have this silly magazine?

Mat,

T97. Down from 65...

[Sean Leary]

Jim, the problem is that I don't know if you are saying that because you are being truthful, or you are saying it because you were pressured to do so.

Seriously Rich?

[Tom_Doak]

Brad makes a great point in regard to Old Mac. I played it in the summer and loved it. A few friends played it over the winter and thought it was the 4th best course there. In the summer wind, #4 was a driver 8 iron. I understand in the winter it was driver, 3 wood, 8 iron. Seeing that a course will play THAT differently in different seasons makes it hard to see that Old Mac is the #3 course in America.

Jim,

It doesn't matter much to me whether you are rating Old Macdonald highly or not, but I do not understand your statement above.

Do you mean that it's hard to get a handle on the course because it changes so much based on conditions?  Or do you see that as a weakness in some way?  It is a very windy place, but no different than any of the other courses in Bandon, or Barnbougle, or Sand Hills, or many of the courses in the UK and Ireland; and the wind has no greater effect at Old Macdonald than on those others.

[David Kelly]

In general, the artist chumming around with the powerful and political is repulsive to me and I think the relationship between architect and those involved in the process is akin to this. When an artist allows themselves to be embraced and brought into the inner circle of power and politics I believe this can have a very corrosive effect on the art and the individual value and vision an artist could have brought to the public.

Art masterpieces all done for the rich and powerful:

Caravaggio- The Martyrdom of Saint Matthew
da Vinci - The Last Supper
Bernini - virtually everything he did
Raphael - Transfiguration
Michelangelo - paintings in the Sistine Chapel
van Eyck - Ghent alterpiece
virtually the entirety of renaissance art
David - Napoleon at the Saint-Bernard Pass & The Coronation of Napoleon
Valazquez - Las Meninas
Tintoretto - Crucifixion
virtually all of Vermeer's work
Matisse - Dance and Dance II both done for rich businessmen
Van Alen - Chrysler Building
Lloyd Wright - The Guggenheim Museum, the Fallingwater house, Johnson-Wax Building
Gehry - Walt Disney Concert Hall

Poor and uncompromising may be how we like to see our artists but great art has traditionally been commissioned by the rich and powerful of this world.  And great golf architecture certainly has been.

[JC Jones]

KBM,

He was saying that the way your post was written that it limited what you were saying to just the "stupid people," which he thinks is about 50 people (though it would have been funnier had he said the other 48 people because 49+1 = 50 and thus it would have been 100%) but could have been any number.

In other words, he is saying you should have said:

"your list is barely credible, but credible enough to get a pass from the people on this site, 98% of which are stupid"

[JC Jones]

George Pazin says: "Read JC Jones' posts and think about them, don't dismiss them."

I'm sorry J.C. I wasn't paying attention what did you say.

Oh a wise guy, eh.  Nuck, nuck, nuck.

[Jim Franklin]

Brad makes a great point in regard to Old Mac. I played it in the summer and loved it. A few friends played it over the winter and thought it was the 4th best course there. In the summer wind, #4 was a driver 8 iron. I understand in the winter it was driver, 3 wood, 8 iron. Seeing that a course will play THAT differently in different seasons makes it hard to see that Old Mac is the #3 course in America.

Jim,

It doesn't matter much to me whether you are rating Old Macdonald highly or not, but I do not understand your statement above.

Do you mean that it's hard to get a handle on the course because it changes so much based on conditions?  Or do you see that as a weakness in some way?  It is a very windy place, but no different than any of the other courses in Bandon, or Barnbougle, or Sand Hills, or many of the courses in the UK and Ireland; and the wind has no greater effect at Old Macdonald than on those others.

Tom -

I loved Old Mac and it is in my personal top 20, but I only played it 3 times in the summer. I think I would love it in all winds, but I have friends that have told me it was not quite as fun in a winter wind. Fortunately, I only plan on visiting Bandon during the summers .

[Jim Franklin]

Jim, the problem is that I don't know if you are saying that because you are being truthful, or you are saying it because you were pressured to do so.

That is what you get when a club tries to too hard to influence what is being said about the club in the public.

And who is pressuring me to do this? Alotian? Golf Digest? I am an adult and have my own opinions. What is The Alotian going to do to me? Not let me play again? So what, there are plenty of other courses in the world I can play. Golf Digest? Again, so what, I have been traveling to play courses well before I became a panelist. Please let me know what you are trying to infer because you are WAY off base my friend.

[Jim Colton]

In the past, I believe GD used to put courses with less than the required votes for the top 100 behind all of the top 100 courses in the state rankings (ex: Friars Head 14th in New York last time). Now they are slotting courses best in state irregardless of the Top 100 status, so you can get some sense of courses that would be top 100 if they had enough votes. For example, Gozzer Ranch is #1 in Idaho, ahead of Black Rock which is #42 on the overall list.  Look for another strong Fazio debut in 2013!

[John Kavanaugh]

When the Golfweek guys finally find a newstand where they can peruse the list for free, or April 5th, whichever comes first, they will be embarrassed at the bunchiness of their panties.  The Alotian is 2/100's of a point higher than Pacific Dunes.  I haven't seen such pettiness since the girl whose brother was just killed in a car wreck was elected Prom Queen.  The child who should have won had a valid point in being disappointed, but really, crying in public was a touch over the top.

[John Kavanaugh]

In the past, I believe GD used to put courses with less than the required votes for the top 100 behind all of the top 100 courses in the state rankings (ex: Friars Head 14th in New York last time). Now they are slotting courses best in state irregardless of the Top 100 status, so you can get some sense of courses that would be top 100 if they had enough votes. For example, Gozzer Ranch is #1 in Idaho, ahead of Black Rock which is #42 on the overall list.  Look for another strong Fazio debut in 2013!

When Whitten retires and his "heir apparent" moves in maybe these problems can be resolved.  Just don't pull a Sokol.

I am happy to see French Lick Dye do so well.

[Brad Tufts]

Brad:

Here's my point -- you have "vested interest" in remaining a panelist.

You missed my point on when I said having a vested interest. As a GD panelist it would be highly unlikely you would say anything critical of the process used by the magazine. Right?

Appreciate your detailed backgrounder but you did say "crazy high" on Old Macdonald -- even with the qualifier you presented initially.

How bout you wait till you play it before tagging the course in some form or fashion? Let me point out that I have played all of the Bandon courses and my expectation for Old Macdonald was very high -- the course exceeded that.

Thanks again for your answers ...

Matt,

It's ok, I knew what you were getting at before I posted last.  I understand that it would be natural to think that I would have a vested interest in the GD system, just as it would be natural for me to think you have a vested interest in the GW system.

My point is that all three prominent rating systems are flawed in certain ways to certain people.  I believe the differences between the three are not enormous.  I'm not willing to say "the GD system is terrible," just as I am not willing to say "the GW system is terrible" about the theoretical competitor ranking.  They are both organized by smart, experienced people who have worked hard to put together a decent system of rankings, and they both further the discussion.  How can that attitude be way off base?  I'm interested in the GW rankings just like I am in those I contribute to for GD.

Re: Old Mac, I don't think we need to harp on it.  I have not played it yetso I don't honestly know how great it is.  For all I know I could totally agree with its greatness 100% after seeing it.  We can change the statement to non-specifc terms if you like:  I would be surprised at any new course debuting at #3 on any well-reputed list after one year of existence.  I am equally surprised at Alotian's rise after a few years of existence on the GD list.  Also makes me excited to see it someday soon!

Still curious:  Do you think you are qualified to be a panelist?  If so, how? If you would like to sit that one out, it's fine...but I've always thought rater-resumes are interesting as we all came into it from different origins.

Thanks.

[Brad Tufts]

In the past, I believe GD used to put courses with less than the required votes for the top 100 behind all of the top 100 courses in the state rankings (ex: Friars Head 14th in New York last time). Now they are slotting courses best in state irregardless of the Top 100 status, so you can get some sense of courses that would be top 100 if they had enough votes. For example, Gozzer Ranch is #1 in Idaho, ahead of Black Rock which is #42 on the overall list.  Look for another strong Fazio debut in 2013!

Wow, even more excited to see the state lists than I was.  I think this is a neat change.

Sort of gives an "in progress" flavor to a few of the courses building their numbers towards a T100 appearance in the future.

[JC Jones]

In the past, I believe GD used to put courses with less than the required votes for the top 100 behind all of the top 100 courses in the state rankings (ex: Friars Head 14th in New York last time). Now they are slotting courses best in state irregardless of the Top 100 status, so you can get some sense of courses that would be top 100 if they had enough votes. For example, Gozzer Ranch is #1 in Idaho, ahead of Black Rock which is #42 on the overall list.  Look for another strong Fazio debut in 2013!

Wow, even more excited to see the state lists than I was.  I think this is a neat change.

Sort of gives an "in progress" flavor to a few of the courses building their numbers towards a T100 appearance in the future.

Brad,

There is a way to see the in state rankings if you check the 3/29 list of candidate courses.

I found them encouraging as Kingsley moved from #13 in Michigan to #6.  All of the Top 5 are in the Top 100 so I am happy to see the progress being made.

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't have the magazine in hand but I believe that even Happy Valley at Quarry's Ridge by Jeffrey Bauer would qualify for the top 100 if it had 20 more votes.  The top public courses give the ranking numbers and only require 25 visits.  Funny thing is that they do not list the architects for the public courses.  I guess the people who play publics don't care.

[John Kavanaugh]

I found them encouraging as Kingsley moved from #13 in Michigan to #6.  All of the Top 5 are in the Top 100 so I am happy to see the progress being made.

Damn, now there is no way you can join Kingsley since Digest would have to remove your ballot and we would have to start the building process all over again.  I was happy to see you start a thread about architecture, sorry I didn't read it, but it was refreshing not to see Kingsley in the title.

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

Interesting point that your buds liked the winter wind for Old Macdonald. But, help me out, did you not understand what Tom D said in reply -- it was the same point I mentioned in last remarks to you. Wind is fundamental to any course near the ocean or large water source. Don't know how that influences your buds but isn't wind -- and all the changes it provides -- part and parcel of all the courses one plays near water?

Brad:

Small correction partner - I have no vested interest in either GD or GW's system. As a former panelist to both I have the wherewithal to provide my comments free of any connection or possibility that I will be removed if I so desire to do so.

You may not want to see this or admit it -- but GD has lost a good bit more than the others when ratings are concerned. GD is the BRAND name - the 800-pound gorilla in the industry and it has squandered that with rating findings that are just mindboggling in so many ways. How does one explain the omission of a number of key courses -- courses that have been opened for quite some time? You'll likely say that such a situation comes solely from me. I would counter and say it's more than that and more than just people who rate for other pubs who are saying that.

The differences are quite "enormous" with GD -- just too many cracks have opened. Brad, c'mon let's be a bit more forthcoming -- you don't say the GD system is terrible because of the fear you can be booted. Just say it plainly -- let's not play the lump all the ratings together and deliver a speech that they could all be better.

The powers that be with each of the ratings don't want comments posted that speak to their own deficiencies -- big brother is alive and well and because so many panelists fear that their wherewithal to access courses will be cut-off they toe the line. Trust me I have heard it from others

Regarding Old Macdonald -- I harp on it because you SAID it was "crazy high" -- you tried to mitigate that assessment with the word "seem" but, with all due respect, that is a word tapdance. Just wait till you play it and then weigh in with whether it's still "crazy high."

Brad, I understand what I personally believe a panelist should be doing. I was involved with different pubs in that capacity so it's fair to assume they wanted me to provide them with free and pertinent consultation in that regard. I was happy to do just that but I don't want to be muzzled and have to cowtow to whatever whims, real or silly ones, they wish to impose.

Your background and involvement with golf is quite evident. You do fit the profile for a GD panelist -- clearly that mag wants to have golf-centric folks and those who can play the game worth a good lick.

Thanks for your info ... I hope what I have provided has been helpful.

[Brad Tufts]

Jim:

Interesting point that your buds liked the winter wind for Old Macdonald. But, help me out, did you not understand what Tom D said in reply -- it was the same point I mentioned in last remarks to you. Wind is fundamental to any course near the ocean or large water source. Don't know how that influences your buds but isn't wind -- and all the changes it provides -- part and parcel of all the courses one plays near water?

Brad:

Small correction partner - I have no vested interest in either GD or GW's system. As a former panelist to both I have the wherewithal to provide my comments free of any connection or possibility that I will be removed if I so desire to do so.

You may not want to see this or admit it -- but GD has lost a good bit more than the others when ratings are concerned. GD is the BRAND name - the 800-pound gorilla in the industry and it has squandered that with rating findings that are just mindboggling in so many ways. How does one explain the omission of a number of key courses -- courses that have been opened for quite some time? You'll likely say that such a situation comes solely from me. I would counter and say it's more than that and more than just people who rate for other pubs who are saying that.

The differences are quite "enormous" with GD -- just too many cracks have opened. Brad, c'mon let's be a bit more forthcoming -- you don't say the GD system is terrible because of the fear you can be booted. Just say it plainly -- let's not play the lump all the ratings together and deliver a speech that they could all be better.

The powers that be with each of the ratings don't want comments posted that speak to their own deficiencies -- big brother is alive and well and because so many panelists fear that their wherewithal to access courses will be cut-off they toe the line. Trust me I have heard it from others

Regarding Old Macdonald -- I harp on it because you SAID it was "crazy high" -- you tried to mitigate that assessment with the word "seem" but, with all due respect, that is a word tapdance. Just wait till you play it and then weigh in with whether it's still "crazy high."

Brad, I understand what I personally believe a panelist should be doing. I was involved with different pubs in that capacity so it's fair to assume they wanted me to provide them with free and pertinent consultation in that regard. I was happy to do just that but I don't want to be muzzled and have to cowtow to whatever whims, real or silly ones, they wish to impose.

Your background and involvement with golf is quite evident. You do fit the profile for a GD panelist -- clearly that mag wants to have golf-centric folks and those who can play the game worth a good lick.

Thanks for your info ... I hope what I have provided has been helpful.

Matt,

Now that I know the full story of your "former" status, your positions make more sense.  Your experience with both panels has no doubt increased your bitterness towards the concept, but regardless you remain riveted to the process and results.

I've tried to give my opinion, and you have discarded it for whatever reason.  You can call me a GD sheep if it makes you feel better, but you currently not being on a panel does not make you seem righteous, it makes it look like you can't work with others.

When you refuse to engage on any level with those interested without escalating, then your opinions come off as someone standing on a street corner yelling into the sky to whomever you think will listen.  If you are lucky, perhaps a few pages from now you'll be the only one left on this thread.  I've tried my best to have a non-abrasive conversation, but it hasn't been successful.

You still won't let the specifics about Old Mac go, even though there aren't any.  In the last 12 hours, the fact I have not played it has not changed.  I have agreed with you that I cannot expound on its quality as of yet, but you continue to tell me I'm wrong about something.  It has nothing to do with Old Mac itself.  It has everything to do with a rating system's willingness to do rate it highly so soon.  If it was Merion or Oakmont or Shinnecock debuting at #3 the first year it opened, I would say the same thing.  I would be surprised that any publication put it that high until I saw for myself.  I guess if I kept my surprise to myself, we could have avoided the Dr. Seuss part of the conversation?

I'm just glad I was able to be called "partner" before I exited this thread.  I was hoping.

[Richard Choi]

Jim, the problem is that I don't know if you are saying that because you are being truthful, or you are saying it because you were pressured to do so.

Seriously Rich?

Seriously.

I am sure Jim and others defending Alotian are being honest, but the club has demonstrated that they can be quite petty when it comes to ANY criticism of the course. And since I do not know how deep that pettiness runs (why would ANY club of ANY note care about some person's random posting on Internet???), there is a doubt in my mind on whether or not how much influence that said club is wielding against those speaking for the club.  It is not that I don't trust the posters, but frankly, I don't trust the club.

[Jim Colton]

In the past, I believe GD used to put courses with less than the required votes for the top 100 behind all of the top 100 courses in the state rankings (ex: Friars Head 14th in New York last time). Now they are slotting courses best in state irregardless of the Top 100 status, so you can get some sense of courses that would be top 100 if they had enough votes. For example, Gozzer Ranch is #1 in Idaho, ahead of Black Rock which is #42 on the overall list.  Look for another strong Fazio debut in 2013!

I just got the magazine in the mail today and there are quite a few examples in the state rankings, including a few classics. I guess some raters only had time to play one course at Baltusrol.

Hawaii: Nanea #2, Kuki'o Golf & Beach Club #3 - between Kapalua Plantation (#88 overall) and The Prince Course (97)
Idaho: Gozzer Ranch #1 - ahead of Black Rock (42)
Indiana: Pete Dye Course at French Lick #3 - between Sycamore Hills (69) and Crooked Stick (96)
Minnesota: Spring Hill #2 - between Interlachen (51) and Hazeltine National (86)
New Jersey: Baltusrol Upper #4 - between Plainfield (76) and Galloway National (91)
New York: Piping Rock #10 - between Garden City (53) and Hudson National (83)
North Carolina: Quail Hollow #5 - between Mountaintop (74) and Diamond Creek (87) - a Fazio sandwich
Ohio: Camargo #2 - between Muirfield Village (19) and The Golf Club (40) - wow!
Ohio: Firestone South #4 - between the Golf Club (40) and Inverness (56)
South Carolina: Yeamans Hall #3 and Kiawah Island River #4 - between The Ocean Course (26) and Sage Valley (81)

Edit: Also noticed GD footnoted 4 courses (French Lick Dye and 3 others) on top 100 public list that have the points but not the votes

Karsten Creek #12 public - 62.20 pts (would put it at 59 overall)
Highland Course at Primland - 62.18 (59)
The Quarry at Giants Ridge - 61.23 (83)
Pete Dye Course at French Lick - 61.17 (T89)