Why does Golf Digest overlook Wine Valley?

[Joe Stansell]

Last August, Golf Digest published its list of "most fun" golf courses. That list included, not surprisingly, Pebble Beach, all five Bandon Resort courses (i.e., including Bandon Preserve), Wild Horse, Rustic Canyon, Barona Creek, and CommonGround, among many others. I have no quibbles with those. But it also included, from the Pacific Northwest, the Coeur d'Alene Resort and Gold Mountain (Olympic). I have played both many times (along with most of the others I listed above) and would definitely have placed Wine Valley ahead of them. Yet Wine Valley was not on the list.

This month Golf Digest published its 2013-14 ranking. With courses like Chambers Bay and Rock Creek Cattle Company outside the top 100, I certainly wouldn't have expected Wine Valley to show up anywhere in the overall rankings -- although I personally think it is in the same league as many that are. But it is, almost certainly, in the same league as courses that Golf Digest included in its 100 greatest "public courses," which included Circling Raven in addition to The Coeur d'Alene Resort. Yet it was not listed there either.

At the very, very least, I would have expected to see Wine Valley near the top of the list of the "best courses" in Washington State. Instead, the list includes, in order, Sahalee, Chambers Bay, Aldarra, Tumble Creek, Royal Oaks, Salish Cliffs, Palouse Ridge, Desert Canyon, TPC Snoqualmie Ridge, and Canterwood.

Why does Golf Digest overlook Wine Valley?

[Andy Troeger]

I'm not sure how many ballots the course has--I would think that 10 panelists would have made it out there by now, but I don't know any personally. Its a course that's probably going to struggle to get and maintain enough panelists to make the national lists just because its so remote.

Greywalls in UP Michigan is kind of like that--I'm going to figure out a way to go see it someday but its not easy to find!

[Matthew Mollica]

Joe, I hear Wine Valley is a great place to play.. With Pasatiempo, Valley Club, Rustic Canyon, and Cal Club all out of the Top 100, I wouldn't bestow great validity upon the GD rankings...

MM

[Joe Stansell]

Matt, Golf Digest has NO credibility when Wine Valley doesn't even crack the state list, much less the "top overall" or even "best public." Andy, thanks for the feedback, but I don't understand why Golfweek is able to dispatch enough raters to place Wine Valley in the top 100 modern and 2nd in the State of Washington.

[Andy Troeger]

Joe,
I'm a bit surprised its not on the Washington state list, but I haven't played it. Golf Digest requires more visits for its national lists than GolfWeek, unless things have changed. But if its not on the state list, I doubt it has the scores to make the national lists anyway.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Joe, looking at Golf Digest's criteria, how would you score it?

[Sam Morrow]

Wine Valley wasn't done by Fazio. I think you automatically lose points for that.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sigh. Do all of you realize you're guilty of the exact behavior you accuse GD of? this is a discussion void of content and populated by biases, resentments and score settling. I have learned nothing about either GD or Wine Valley.

I'm sorry to pick on everyone in this thread -- yes, ALL of you! -- but it's emblematic of a sadly too-common form of nonthinking frequent to this board.

So I'll ask again: can somebody score, using GD's criteria, Wine Valley? Please don't just post numbers but explain your reasoning and especially how you interpreted the criteria. Then tell us where that places it in the state list. If you feel it's too low, please score ALL courses listed higher. Be honest. Don't just grind your ax and insult your and our intelligences.

I am asking for this because it will help us understand not what all of you think your beef is but what it most likely really is: with the criteria, its interpretation, rater travel habits, or even your own personal preferences. (What? Nooo...)

[Mark Saltzman]

Wine Valley will be favoured by this group for sure. I think it is one of the two best courses in the state.

MSB, I will work through the GD criteria and see how it scores.

[Mike Wagner]

The WA state list is bad.

Mark, I can't score Wine Valley as I haven't played...but I grew up in Seattle and can tell you there's a course on that list that's a 0.  I can name at least 50 better courses in WA than Canterwood, and maybe the same with Desert Canyon.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Mike,

I know you don't mean zero literally. That's pretty much impossible to accomplish using GD's criteria and process.

Maybe you could score Canterwood using GD's criteria -- and be serious not flip -- then explain to us your logic. Feel free to base your numbers by comparing to how you score other courses of which you have a favorable opinion.

I'm not baiting you or attacking you personally, I'm just trying to generate some level of thinking, any level of thinking, that gets us past comments like "this list is bad" / "course X is ranked too low / high."

To call a ranking stupid / thoughtless / bad / etc without actually addressing the substance of the ranking or how the rankings are done is, well, stupid / thoughtless / bad / etc.

[Sean_A]

If folks could get it into their heads that the top 100 is really a top 250ish then there wouldn't be so much angst.  Its just that 250 courses can't fit  into a space for 100.  Choosing which is 75 and which is 175 (both arbitrary and in themselves meaningless numbers) is a fool's errand no matter how objective Mark wants the discussion to be.  Objectivity can only take the discussion so far and so far as I am concerned, its a step backward in the conversation. 

Ciao

[Joe Stansell]

If folks could get it into their heads that the top 100 is really a top 250ish then there wouldn't be so much angst. 

My complaint is not that Wine Valley is not in the top 100. My complaint is that it is not even in the top 10 in Washington State. And its absence completely undermines whatever credibility Golf Digest might have when it says, these courses are the "best of ...."

[Mark Bourgeois]

Actually, Sean, aren't we making essentially the same point? As with the minuscule difference on the conditioning thread between Ballyneal and the 79th course, by going through an exercise of using GD's criteria I think the outcomes will demonstrate your contention.

...and Joe comes through with an argument in favor of rankings.

[Sean Leary]

If folks could get it into their heads that the top 100 is really a top 250ish then there wouldn't be so much angst.  Its just that 250 courses can't fit  into a space for 100.  Choosing which is 75 and which is 175 (both arbitrary and in themselves meaningless numbers) is a fool's errand no matter how objective Mark wants the discussion to be.  Objectivity can only take the discussion so far and so far as I am concerned, its a step backward in the conversation. 

Ciao

Dead on...

Joe, I would bet that Wine Valley didn't get enough ratings to be eligible even for the state list....Walla Walla is not exactly easy to get to.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean, would you be willing to score the course using Golf Digest's criteria? So far nobody seems to want to take on that job, preferring the easy route of random bashing.

People, was Harvey Penick right? Quoting Emerson, he said thinking is the hardest thing in the world -- that's why so few of us do it.

[Sean Leary]

Sean, would you be willing to score the course using Golf Digest's criteria? So far nobody seems to want to take on that job, preferring the easy route of random bashing.

People, was Harvey Penick right? Quoting Emerson, he said thinking is the hardest thing in the world -- that's why so few of us do it.

Haven't played it..Hope to go out there with a couple of Canucks this year.

[Joe Stansell]

Joe, I would bet that Wine Valley didn't get enough ratings to be eligible even for the state list....Walla Walla is not exactly easy to get to.

Fine, then the publication should say, these are the "best of ... the courses in Washington State that are easy for us to get to."

And I'm not necessarily buying that argument, either. Desert Canyon is not an easy trip. Nor is Palouse Ridge for that matter.

Also, Wine Valley is apparently well known by enough golfers in the area that it finished behind Chambers Bay in a Washington State popularity contest published in Cascade Golfer: http://bit.ly/WS4NhL  My view is that the masses aren't mistaken; but Golf Digest is. 

[Sean_A]

Sean, would you be willing to score the course using Golf Digest's criteria? So far nobody seems to want to take on that job, preferring the easy route of random bashing.

People, was Harvey Penick right? Quoting Emerson, he said thinking is the hardest thing in the world -- that's why so few of us do it.

Mark

I have never played Wine Valley so no, I can't do it. 

I am not random bashing the ranking system - I am saying ranking by numbers is not going to get the job done.  I don't think anything can get the job done.  There is far too much subjectivity to relate to numbers.  Its not as if we are talking about Ravi Shankar playing the sitar where maths and the ability to follow intricate maths patterns is a great benefit to the listener.  While I acknowledge that some course consistently come out in the top echelon when rated by golfers, I can't say as I fully understand why this is the case other than to say we each have personal likes and dislikes. 

I tried to do the earnest ranking thing on LINKS100.  It was a nightmare trying to split hairs where there was nothing to split.  My brain just doesn't work this way when it comes to evaluating courses.

Ciao

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean A, sorry I meant Sean L!

Anyway, to your point: you're welcome to take GD's cardinal numbers and ignore the ordinal ones. That's the same thing as Guide Richelin, just with different units. Otherwise, same system.

EDIT:

Joe S, I take it you have decided the problem is WV's overall GD score, whatever that score may be?

[Phil McDade]

Mark:

Joe's original question -- Why does GD overlook Wine Valley? -- seems like a good one. I didn't see anywhere in his original post any bashing of GD, or any evidence of "biases, resentments and score settling." (And you include Joe among those exhibiting such behavior...).

It's a legitimate question. Not enough raters get to it? Maybe GD ought to include that information in its report. Not thought of highly enough vis-a-vis other courses in the state/region? OK, but that's contrary to what other, presumably credible publications like the ones cited by Joe suggest.

Most of us here on GCA aren't raters. Most of us don't know the ratings criteria of the various golf publications. Most of us simply want to learn more about golf courses and their architecture, and to some extent how courses are like, and not like, other courses we know. Seems like a legitimate topic.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Phil, so when can we begin that discussion of why GD apparently overlooks Wine Valley?

This discussion has taught me zero about the course. If I have learned anything, it is that some people believe Walla Walla is hard for Golf Digest raters to get to (but not for Golfweek raters).

[Joe Stansell]

Joe S, I take it you have decided the problem is WV's overall GD score, whatever that score may be?

Let me put it this way. Almost everyone would agree that the Mona Lisa is a great painting. When someone compiles a list of great paintings, and the list excludes the Mona Lisa, that list lacks credibility. It would not be up to the doubters to explain whether the compiler of the list used the wrong criteria or simply misapplied its own criteria. It is wrong either way.

I am not, by any stretch, claiming that Wine Valley is a Mona Lisa. But is is well praised by many well-travelled golfers on this site (Mark Saltzman, as an example) and well regarded by the public in this State (see Cascade Golfer). I therefore cannot explain its omission in Golf Digest as among "the best of ... Washington State." If it is too inconvenient for enough raters to see it, then the publication should say so. If it is off the list because of the criteria used or a misapplication of the criteria, then I would suggest Golf Digest needs to revisit its methodology. 

[Sean Leary]

Joe, I would bet that Wine Valley didn't get enough ratings to be eligible even for the state list....Walla Walla is not exactly easy to get to.

Fine, then the publication should say, these are the "best of ... the courses in Washington State that are easy for us to get to."

And I'm not necessarily buying that argument, either. Desert Canyon is not an easy trip. Nor is Palouse Ridge for that matter.

Also, Wine Valley is apparently well known by enough golfers in the area that it finished behind Chambers Bay in a Washington State popularity contest published in Cascade Golfer: http://bit.ly/WS4NhL  My view is that the masses aren't mistaken; but Golf Digest is. 

Desert Canyon has been open a lot longer than Wine Valley has.. Maybe I am wrong and it has enough ratings but didn't make the Top 10. Maybe it is too wide/easy whatever. Maybe it is the grass type. I can't believe that Chambers doesn't make Top 100 either, and Sahalee does. Locally CB gets a bad rap from the private club set because of the conditions. That is the only way I see it outside the top 100.

Good news is that that more it gets overlooked by GD raters (if that is the case), I think the higher rating it will have with Golfweek.

[Phil McDade]

Phil, so when can we begin that discussion of why GD apparently overlooks Wine Valley?

This discussion has taught me zero about the course. If I have learned anything, it is that some people believe Walla Walla is hard for Golf Digest raters to get to (but not for Golfweek raters).

Mark:

See "Search" button -- upper right of your screen -- and a blank box that allows one to type in the words "Wine Valley":

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45716.0.html

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,48960.0.html

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,52860.0.html

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,51048.0.html

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,40942.0.html