Top Ten Post-modern - voting ends Sunday

[Jim Colton]

Brad,

  I took the raw data and tried to model a "score" that represents the relative quality of each course. The score is on the y-axis, but the numbers aren't really relevant so I didn't included them on the chart.

[John Kavanaugh]

Jim,

What you do not put up is the formula you used to devise the raw rank.  What percentage of people voted Ellerston with 3 stars and how does that compare to the number that voted Sand Hills with 3?  Does Mike Nuzzo get to see the ballots of everyone that voted for Wolf Point?  How can you justify not posting a link to all the ballots with identities included.  Who are the ex-members mucking up the list?  Maybe Ran through them off the site for past architectural ignorance and we should be aware of their shenanigans.

[Kalen Braley]

While I don't care who voted for what...

...it would be interesting to see the raw numbers.  I'm guessing you took the total points and divided it by the number of votes to get a score?

For example:

Say 4 people vote for a course:  2 vote 3 stars, and 2 people vote 2 stars.  So thats a total of 10 points/4 votes for a finishing score of 2.5.  And then the courses are ranked on thier average score?

[John Kavanaugh]

While I don't care who voted for what...

...it would be interesting to see the raw numbers.  I'm guessing you took the total points and divided it by the number of votes to get a score?

For example:

Say 4 people vote for a course:  2 vote 3 stars, and 2 people vote 2 stars.  So thats a total of 10 points/4 votes for a finishing score of 2.5.  And then the courses are ranked on thier average score?

I promise you it was not that simple.  That would be like Colton going to DQ for a cone.

[Ben Sims]

This is getting ridiculous.

Kavanaugh and Jones arguing for either transparancy and/or non-bias voting.  Seriously?

And some of you thinking that a guy giving three of four 3-star votes versus only one or two 1-star votes means he is statistically an outlier is ridiculous as well.  What if the last nine golf courses I have seen are Hidden Creek, Plainfield, Pine Valley, Friars Head, Sleepy Hollow, Palmetto, Wolf Point, Sanctuary and Ballyneal?  I mean, there's quite a few 8's and above on that list.  Does that mean it's invalid?

[Jim Colton]

Jim,

What you do not put up is the formula you used to devise the raw rank.  What percentage of people voted Ellerston with 3 stars and how does that compare to the number that voted Sand Hills with 3?  Does Mike Nuzzo get to see the ballots of everyone that voted for Wolf Point?  How can you justify not posting a link to all the ballots with identities included.  Who are the ex-members mucking up the list?  Maybe Ran through them off the site for past architectural ignorance and we should be aware of their shenanigans.

John,

  Here's the top 10 using just the GCA population:

1. Sand Hills
2. Pacific Dunes
3. Barnbougle Dunes
4. Ballyneal
5. Friar's Head
6. Ellerston
7. Cape Kidnappers
8. Rock Creek
9. Old Macdonald
10. Lost Farm

Nanea snuck in at 25th at the expense of Boston Golf Club, which dropped from 23rd to 26th.

Elerston has 3 ** votes.

Folks had the opportunity to post their ballots publicly if they wanted to.

Nuzzo probably knows the 8 folks who voted for Wolf Point off the top of his head.

The modeling was done through logistic regression, so unless you know the probit function, the formula won't mean much to you. But the concept is the greater the difference between the scores, the greater probability that one course is better than the other. If somebody else wants to take a different approach (either simpler or more complex) with the numbers, by all means go ahead and collect your own data. You can even use my drag-and-drop if you want to.

[Kalen Braley]

Jim,

While I did take some probability and stats in college, safe to say I didn't make it far enough to cover the probit functions. Looks like it was pretty well thought out on your side 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probit

[John Kavanaugh]

The modeling was done through logistic regression, so unless you know the probit function, the formula won't mean much to you. But the concept is the greater the difference between the scores, the greater probability that one course is better than the other. If somebody else wants to take a different approach (either simpler or more complex) with the numbers, by all means go ahead and collect your own data. You can even use my drag-and-drop if you want to.

Jim,

Send me the ballots to spooon@usa.net and I will use my approach and post the results.  I knew you weren't a DQ guy. I am a registered professional engineer, thus quite qualified.

[Mike Nuzzo]

10 people have visited Wolf Point from GCA - including me and Don.
So I can say with ~80% confidence who voted, but not how they voted. 

I guess I should have given it ***, not **.
The fact that Don likes it as much as he does is a big deal to me.

Cheers

[Jim Colton]

The modeling was done through logistic regression, so unless you know the probit function, the formula won't mean much to you. But the concept is the greater the difference between the scores, the greater probability that one course is better than the other. If somebody else wants to take a different approach (either simpler or more complex) with the numbers, by all means go ahead and collect your own data. You can even use my drag-and-drop if you want to.

Jim,

Send me the ballots to spooon@usa.net and I will use my approach and post the results.  I knew you weren't a DQ guy. I am a registered professional engineer, thus quite qualified.

http://www.dunkladder.com/sort2.html

Feel free to send John your data at the e-mail above, either as a new entry or forward what you already submitted to me.

[John Kavanaugh]

The modeling was done through logistic regression, so unless you know the probit function, the formula won't mean much to you. But the concept is the greater the difference between the scores, the greater probability that one course is better than the other. If somebody else wants to take a different approach (either simpler or more complex) with the numbers, by all means go ahead and collect your own data. You can even use my drag-and-drop if you want to.

Jim,

Send me the ballots to spooon@usa.net and I will use my approach and post the results.  I knew you weren't a DQ guy. I am a registered professional engineer, thus quite qualified.

http://www.dunkladder.com/sort2.html

Feel free to send John your data at the e-mail above, either as a new entry or forward what you already submitted to me.

I will never understand a secret ballot where only one architect gets to see the votes.  Don't you think Lester George deserves to see who gave Kinloch a 0 so he knows who to give a room next to the ice machine at the upcoming Ballyhack outing? 

[Jim Colton]

The modeling was done through logistic regression, so unless you know the probit function, the formula won't mean much to you. But the concept is the greater the difference between the scores, the greater probability that one course is better than the other. If somebody else wants to take a different approach (either simpler or more complex) with the numbers, by all means go ahead and collect your own data. You can even use my drag-and-drop if you want to.

Jim,

Send me the ballots to spooon@usa.net and I will use my approach and post the results.  I knew you weren't a DQ guy. I am a registered professional engineer, thus quite qualified.

http://www.dunkladder.com/sort2.html

Feel free to send John your data at the e-mail above, either as a new entry or forward what you already submitted to me.

I will never understand a secret ballot where only one architect gets to see the votes.  Don't you think Lester George deserves to see who gave Kinloch a 0 so he knows who to give a room next to the ice machine at the upcoming Ballyhack outing? 

Tom hasn't seen the individual ballots other than the ones that have been publicly posted.

  Jim

[John Kavanaugh]

Tom hasn't seen the individual ballots other than the ones that have been publicly posted.

  Jim

Thank God, if his head got any bigger Ted Turner might mistake him for a Buffalo on his next trip out to Nebraska.

[Mike Benham]

As hard as I tried to fix the system, I just couldn't get Ballyneal ahead of Sand Hills.

Forget Sand Hills, you couldn't even get Ballyneal ahead of Barn Dunes or Pac Dunes.

[Anthony Gray]

I'm a little surprised to see a course up there I've never even heard of in Ellerston.

I'm with Jimmy, I would think there should be a minimum number of votes to qualify...

Outside of that, I don't see any other issues with that top 25 list...looks about right!

  Me too. What's up with Ellerston?

 Anthony

[Sean Leary]

I certainly do not have an issue with the results although RCCC is still #1 in my eyes.

Jim, of this entire board, only 27 people have seen it - a very low percentage.  I know what I saw with my own eyes when 7 other guys went apeshit over the place after playing Sand Hills just the day before.  That's a very high percentage - 100% in fact.  So, seeing how the raw number isn't that much smaller, I'm going with the views of 100% of 8 people over the views of 27 out of 500 or a 1000 or so GCA members who probably saw this thread.......

Was it the place or the course that they went apeshit over?

[Jim Franklin]

I certainly do not have an issue with the results although RCCC is still #1 in my eyes.

Jim, of this entire board, only 27 people have seen it - a very low percentage.  I know what I saw with my own eyes when 7 other guys went apeshit over the place after playing Sand Hills just the day before.  That's a very high percentage - 100% in fact.  So, seeing how the raw number isn't that much smaller, I'm going with the views of 100% of 8 people over the views of 27 out of 500 or a 1000 or so GCA members who probably saw this thread.......

Was it the place or the course that they went apeshit over?

I loved the course and the rest of the club was pretty awesome too. I do not factor the "other" stuff into a course opinion, although they will get factored in on an overall experience. 

[Sean Leary]

I certainly do not have an issue with the results although RCCC is still #1 in my eyes.

Jim, of this entire board, only 27 people have seen it - a very low percentage.  I know what I saw with my own eyes when 7 other guys went apeshit over the place after playing Sand Hills just the day before.  That's a very high percentage - 100% in fact.  So, seeing how the raw number isn't that much smaller, I'm going with the views of 100% of 8 people over the views of 27 out of 500 or a 1000 or so GCA members who probably saw this thread.......

Was it the place or the course that they went apeshit over?

I loved the course and the rest of the club was pretty awesome too. I do not factor the "other" stuff into a course opinion, although they will get factored in on an overall experience. 

Totally understood, and I am one of those people that "place"  and "experience " absolutely matters.

Just curious if any of the Shivas 10 had been to a place like RCCC/Montana before? 

[Kalen Braley]

My take on RCCC was slightly different.

While no doubt its an exceptional course, I thought Pac Dunes, Ballyneal, and RCCC are all of the same calibur.  How one stacks them up just comes down to personal preference.

Whether its the ocean side, dunes/links experience of Pac Dunes
Or the inland, interior/prarie land feel of Ballyneal, which always plays linksy.
Or the rugged, occasional trees,  almost mountain style golf, which also plays linksy...

...which ever one floats your boat the most is subjective at best.

They are all 9s in my books, and I put them at:

9A) PD
9B) Ballyneal
9C) RCCC

[Jim Franklin]

Sean - I think his crew just came from Sand Hills on that trip. I may be mistaken, but fairly sure.

Yes Kalen, those three are fantastic.

[paul cowley]

Greg Tallman wrote;

"With all due respect I doubt this list proves anything beyond what was already known, that being the fact that most on this site prefer a course of a certain style an by certain designers. While I might agree more with this type of a list I would further suggest that it is no more accurate than any other given the like mindedness of most who particpated.

Interesting that Diamante scored so low among those who like that type of golf course and setting. I imagine Paul Cowley and his cohorts will be much more pleased when GOLF comes out with their list in the coming weeks."

Greg...this ranking (#35 GCA Best Course Post 1995) achieved my low expectations considering how few of the raters had seen our course. Hopefully GOLF had a few more out there! Gracias Amigo.

[Greg Tallman]

Greg Tallman wrote;

"With all due respect I doubt this list proves anything beyond what was already known, that being the fact that most on this site prefer a course of a certain style an by certain designers. While I might agree more with this type of a list I would further suggest that it is no more accurate than any other given the like mindedness of most who particpated.

Interesting that Diamante scored so low among those who like that type of golf course and setting. I imagine Paul Cowley and his cohorts will be much more pleased when GOLF comes out with their list in the coming weeks."

Greg...this ranking (#35 GCA Best Course Post 1995) achieved my low expectations considering how few of the raters had seen our course. Hopefully GOLF had a few more out there! Gracias Amigo.

Paul,

I figured you would get more love on this site but that tends to demonstrate other biases present here. Not to worry you'll be a proud papa here shortly.

Sincerely,
Ole Gramps Getting Kicked To the Curb  

[Brett_Morrissy]

Interesting that accessibility for the top moderns has a much higher ratio than the classics.

Or is that skewing the preferences as they are easier to see?

I cannot believe that many people have seen Ellerston.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Greg and Paul,

You can take a measure of comfort in knowing you both apparently beat the pants off Pinnacle Point.

Jim,

Thank you for the effort. I appreciate the number crunching. I don't know anything about statistical models like probit -- does it assume a normal distribution? Given we all agree the contributors have biases, my guess is we don't have a normal distribution. Does it assume normal distribution of error? Given that we could see many contributors' votes while the ballots were open, and could "adjust" our voting accordingly, I'm not sure we have normal distro of error, either.

Enough of that.

Would it be possible to just post the average number of "stars" each course received? If you want, you could round the numbers so we got four simple groupings of ***, **, *, and 0 -- you could set the roundings relatively high to err on the side of conservatism:
Average     stars
>= 2.75      ***
>= 1.75       **
>= 0.75        *
<   0.75        0

Frankly, I find ordinal rankings frustrating and almost "number-free" -- all they do is provide qualitative comparisons, eg this course is better than than that course or courses.

Mark

[Chris Johnston]

I, too, would like to see average numbers for the full field and number of voters as well.