[Jim_Kennedy]

To be frank, I really think the answer might not lie with the golf course at all.  Rather the raters.

I believe the way Golf Magazine does it, doesn't lend itself to turnover at the top.  Turnover at the top, per their process, only occurs when people change their mind.  I can make a logical case, based on known patterns of human behavior, that this will not happen until a new process is adopted and/or a new crop of raters is brought in.

Mac:

That's a very important point and it's lost on a lot of people -- no matter how good a course you build, it's ultimately a subjective matter and having it ranked among the top 50 or top 10 in the world ultimately depends on the psychology of the people on the rating panel.  You say it's more true for the GOLF Magazine panel, but it's true for them all, whether they are submitting number grades or letter grades or whatever, it's just human nature that many people will hold onto their own personal favorite no matter what. 

The #1 spot on the GOLFWEEK Modern and Classic lists hasn't changed too much over the years, either; and GOLF DIGEST's only varies because they keep fudging around with how they compute the numbers.

Why would minds, or position in the rankings, change much? The courses at the top are proven contenders, seen many times and rated accordingly. It's a boxing match, where the 'upstart' is not going to win the bout by trading blows with the champ.

Maybe it's just that the crop of contenders aren't 'powerful' enough to deliver a blow that would change the minds of the rater corp.

  

[Mac Plumart]

To be frank, I really think the answer might not lie with the golf course at all.  Rather the raters.

I believe the way Golf Magazine does it, doesn't lend itself to turnover at the top.  Turnover at the top, per their process, only occurs when people change their mind.  I can make a logical case, based on known patterns of human behavior, that this will not happen until a new process is adopted and/or a new crop of raters is brought in.

Mac:

That's a very important point and it's lost on a lot of people -- no matter how good a course you build, it's ultimately a subjective matter and having it ranked among the top 50 or top 10 in the world ultimately depends on the psychology of the people on the rating panel.  You say it's more true for the GOLF Magazine panel, but it's true for them all, whether they are submitting number grades or letter grades or whatever, it's just human nature that many people will hold onto their own personal favorite no matter what. 

The #1 spot on the GOLFWEEK Modern and Classic lists hasn't changed too much over the years, either; and GOLF DIGEST's only varies because they keep fudging around with how they compute the numbers.

Tom, I agree.  I only picked Golf Magazine because we are talking #1 in the World.  Of the Big 3, I think only Golf Magazine does a Top 100 World list.  Golfweek keeps each list seperate and distinct (Modern, Classic, US, GB/I, etc).  While Golf Digest does Top 100 US, Top 100 Outside US.  Right?


Steve...

Is it possible that the best course in the world HAS been built in the last 20 or so years and all it needs is time to build it's own folklore and legend (which I think plays a huge part in our perceptions).

YES!!!  Time will tell how this shakes out.  We have examples of over-looked courses rocketing up the rankings when they are re-discovered and/or fully appreciated.  I have no doubt whatsoever that some course currently in existence is getting overlooked, whether it is off the list entirely or simply under-rated I am unsure.  

[Mac Plumart]

To be frank, I really think the answer might not lie with the golf course at all.  Rather the raters.

I believe the way Golf Magazine does it, doesn't lend itself to turnover at the top.  Turnover at the top, per their process, only occurs when people change their mind.  I can make a logical case, based on known patterns of human behavior, that this will not happen until a new process is adopted and/or a new crop of raters is brought in.

Mac:

That's a very important point and it's lost on a lot of people -- no matter how good a course you build, it's ultimately a subjective matter and having it ranked among the top 50 or top 10 in the world ultimately depends on the psychology of the people on the rating panel.  You say it's more true for the GOLF Magazine panel, but it's true for them all, whether they are submitting number grades or letter grades or whatever, it's just human nature that many people will hold onto their own personal favorite no matter what. 

The #1 spot on the GOLFWEEK Modern and Classic lists hasn't changed too much over the years, either; and GOLF DIGEST's only varies because they keep fudging around with how they compute the numbers.

Why would minds, or position in the rankings, change much? The courses at the top are proven contenders, seen many times and rated accordingly. It's a boxing match, where the 'upstart' is not going to win the bout by trading blows with the champ.

Maybe it's just that the crop of contenders aren't 'powerful' enough to deliver a blow that would change the minds of the rater corp.

  

Certainly could be the case Jim.  But wasn't Crystal Downs unranked for quite some time, but now it is regarded as a classic.  Not #1, but certainly a World Top 100 type of course.  I can give other examples, but I'm sure you know them. 

And, to touch directly on your question...I don't think minds will change at all.  I think new minds will take over the rating process and voice their opinions and make their mark.

[David Harshbarger]

Out of the way...great site...lots of sandy dunes...great backstory...great architect and visionary owner living onsite for many years....

Could the future world #1 be opening in 7 weeks?  Is it's name Cabot Links?

[Jackson C]

Curious, why is China the best bet?
Based on future volume of courses, one of which, percentage wise, will have to be truly outstanding?
I am guessing there is more to it than that, but what is it?
Is China blessed with great golf land?  Does China have the equivalent of say the linksland in Tasmania?

[John Kavanaugh]

No one course is ever the best course in the world 365 days a year.  I would estimate that there are 50 courses that over a ten year period may be the best course in the world on one perfect day.  Certainly there is that one course that hits more days than any other.

Lucky for me, I have little interest in a course that is the best for every golfer.  My best course in the world most likely would not be yours.  I once played Riviera on Monday the day after the L.A. Open.  A sudden storm sent everyone home and we had the course to ourselves on the setup that remained from Sunday.  At that moment Riviera may have been the best course in the world.  There are just too many outside factors affecting the other 49 candidates to know for sure.

note:  If you are over a 10 handicap Riviera would never be the best course in the world for you.  I'd stick with Cypress for the views or The Old Course for the history.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac,
In our modern and well connected era the chances that a Crystal Downs would remain unnoticed are slim, if not none.

I think minds can be changed, a course like, say, Sand Hills did that. If something 'better' than SH comes along I'd bet it will get recognized, and almost immediately.

[Tom_Doak]

Curious, why is China the best bet?
Based on future volume of courses, one of which, percentage wise, will have to be truly outstanding?
I am guessing there is more to it than that, but what is it?
Is China blessed with great golf land?  Does China have the equivalent of say the linksland in Tasmania?

Jackson:

I said China not because of the future volume of courses [although that helps!], but because there are so many landscapes there as yet untapped for golf ... maybe there's a landscape like the heathlands around London which we've yet to see.  And because pretty much all of the land there is "available" for development if the developer knows the right people.

I also said it because I've got one site in particular where I think the sky is the limit [although it is going to take a LOT of work].

[Jason Thurman]

Legacy and history are powerful forces. It's why even the best Coldplay song will never get held in the same esteem as "Imagine."

Perhaps not the best example to illustrate your point....

Probably the better comparison is The Beatles. It's pretty much impossible to imagine another band replacing them as the de facto GOAT. They have a lot working for them.

• Immense popularity at a time of the proliferation of their genre which enabled them to be true groundbreakers. There's a big advantage to looking like a true original, and everyone who comes after them will be stuck by the fact that they couldn't have existed without their Liverpool forefathers.
• Death. Nothing cements a legacy like tragedy.
• Genuine originality and quality of a world-class and timeless nature.

Pine Valley has all three. I think only the second is optional (but still beneficial). It's awfully hard to capture the third, and number one is almost impossible in an established medium like course design in the 21st century.

[Jackson C]

Curious, why is China the best bet?
Based on future volume of courses, one of which, percentage wise, will have to be truly outstanding?
I am guessing there is more to it than that, but what is it?
Is China blessed with great golf land?  Does China have the equivalent of say the linksland in Tasmania?

Jackson:

I said China not because of the future volume of courses [although that helps!], but because there are so many landscapes there as yet untapped for golf ... maybe there's a landscape like the heathlands around London which we've yet to see.  And because pretty much all of the land there is "available" for development if the developer knows the right people.

I also said it because I've got one site in particular where I think the sky is the limit [although it is going to take a LOT of work].

OK!
I was wondering if you had something up your sleeve.    All makes sense now.
I promise I will make a special trip to China just to play it.  Good luck.

[Mac Plumart]

Mac,
In our modern and well connected era the chances that a Crystal Downs would remain unnoticed are slim, if not none.

I disagree.  It is not that they don't get noticed, it is whether the people playing a non-rated (or under-rated) course have the courage to voice an opinion that goes against the consensus. 

Furthermore, how many U.S. based golfers (European, Canadian, etc) have taken the time and made the effort to play far away courses?  Perhaps in China, or some other remote location in the world.  Nepal, Tasmania, etc.

I respect your opinion and appreciate it, but I simply disagree.  To each their own, time will tell.  Let's circle back on this in 50 years.   

[Carl Johnson]

I thought Donald Trump had already done it.   

Absolutely, and more than once.

[Tim Gavrich]

The truly "best course in the world" would necessarily have to be the best course every single person who had played it had ever played.  I can't see this as being remotely possible, given the diversity in human aesthetic and experiential preferences.

Is there anything manmade that, from the perspective of every single person who has experienced it, is the best of its kind?


"There are no eternal facts, as there are no absolute truths."
       – Friedrich Nietzsche; Human, All-too-Human

[John Kavanaugh]

An iPhone comes awful close. I didn't believe it until I used one.

[Jud_T]

An iPhone comes awful close. I didn't believe it until I used one.

Now imagine if they let you use the iPhone for free.... 

[Mac Plumart]

The truly "best course in the world" would necessarily have to be the best course every single person who had played it had ever played.

Tim, "The Best Course in the World" is simply the course Golf Magazine ranks as #1.  That seems to be the go to list for these World #1 lists.

[Alex Lagowitz]

Tom Doak,

Do you think if a client asked you to build the modern Pine Valley that you would be able to do it?
Would you accept this offer?

[Tom_Doak]

Tom Doak,

Do you think if a client asked you to build the modern Pine Valley that you would be able to do it?
Would you accept this offer?

Alex:

I would if we could find the right piece of land to make it work.  In all the talk about why Pine Valley is so great, the piece of property doesn't get nearly enough attention.

[David Harshbarger]

To paraphrase some comments so far:

1. Course must be perfection
2. Course must be seen by raters as perfection
3. Course must exemplify perfection in a novel, and superior, manner.

To get the raters to vote the new course in the top tier more than PV and TOC, the new World's best can't be an imitation of the best inland and links courses.  As long as any new course is seen as a descendant of these manifestations of perfection, how can a new course be more perfect?

If you asked a different question, like "Is it possible to build a new Doak 10?" the answer must obviously be "Yes!!!"  All one has to do for that is 1., build a perfect course! 

[Morgan Clawson]

Is it possible to build the best course in the world? Absolutely.

There are 9 Golf Week courses with a rating of 9.0 or higher.

Two of the 9 were built in the last 20 years. So, they may not be the best right now, but they are darned close!  Perhaps Streamsong (composite  ) will be #1!?

Pine Valley Golf Club 9.56
1919, Harry S. Colt, George Crump

Cypress Point Club 9.48
1928, Alister MacKenzie

Shinnecock Hills Golf Club 9.36
1931, William S. Flynn, Howard C. Toomey

National Golf Links of America 9.29
1911, Charles Blair Macdonald

Sand Hills Golf Club 9.27
1995, Bill Coore, Ben Crenshaw

Pacific Dunes 9.10
2001, Tom Doak

Oakmont Country Club 9.10
1903, Henry Fownes

Augusta National Golf Club 9.08
1932, Bobby Jones, Alister MacKenzie

Merion Golf Club (East) 9.00
1912, Hugh Wilson


Also, I don't buy that a new set of panelists would yield significantly different results. Are any of the courses above over rated?

[Mac Plumart]

Don't forget Royal County Down at 9.04.

[David_Elvins]

Is it possible to build the best course in the world? Absolutely.

There are 9 Golf Week courses with a rating of 9.0 or higher.

Two of the 9 were built in the last 20 years. So, they may not be the best right now, but they are darned close!  Perhaps Streamsong (composite  ) will be #1!?

Pine Valley Golf Club 9.56
1919, Harry S. Colt, George Crump

Cypress Point Club 9.48
1928, Alister MacKenzie

Shinnecock Hills Golf Club 9.36
1931, William S. Flynn, Howard C. Toomey

National Golf Links of America 9.29
1911, Charles Blair Macdonald

Sand Hills Golf Club 9.27
1995, Bill Coore, Ben Crenshaw

Pacific Dunes 9.10
2001, Tom Doak

Oakmont Country Club 9.10
1903, Henry Fownes

Augusta National Golf Club 9.08
1932, Bobby Jones, Alister MacKenzie

Merion Golf Club (East) 9.00
1912, Hugh Wilson

That's a very small world  

As for the question posed by the OP, I am sure it is possible to build the best course in the world but after the trouble George Crump went through, would it be worth it? 

[Sean_A]

Of course this is a bit of a loaded question because we all know there is no such thing as the best course in the world.  JakaB comes closest to answering this question.

Ciao

[Don_Mahaffey]

I believe if you actually set out with the goal of building “the best course in the world” you would have no chance of achieving your goal. Even on a great site, with a great architect and great client, chasing a goal like “best in the world” would generate too much noise/analysis to reach the solitude and clarity needed to achieve the level of creativity and restraint required to craft something considered the best ever. With very skillful work, you could probably earn top something status in someone’s list. But a course deemed the best in the world 25-50 years from now will take something more than just trying to please modern day golf raters. IMO, for a course to have a chance to be view as the best in the world 10, 20, 50 years from now it would have to be somewhat controversial right out of the gate.

[Kirk Gill]

Of course this is a bit of a loaded question because we all know there is no such thing as the best course in the world.  JakaB comes closest to answering this question.

Can't argue with this. What's the best painting in the world? The best building?

Seems like there's a difference, though, between building a course that you as the owner or the designer think is the best course possible, and building a course that might somehow excite the rater panels enough to create a "best in the world" consensus. Fulfilling one's own criteria for what is best seems a lot less perilous than trying to satisfy someone else's criteria. Most people suck when it comes to mind-reading.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()