Golf Magazine Top 100 Newcomers

[Nigel Islam]

Tom,

There's always the question of not confusing cause and effect. I wish they wouldn't have added irrigation. I'm sure they didn't do it to make the list but I can see the impact of that decision being making the list. Hopefully it doesn't go any further than that. It sure was nice to have at least one legitimately top tier course that could bridge us in this way to the past.

Seems too early to have a cause/effect with the new watering system.  Although, this year of all years the difference in conditioning should be very marked. 

It seems to me there should always be a sacred four which are automatic for the world top 100.  One is, but the other three should be as well. 

Rye
North Berwick
TOC
St Enodoc

I spose since there is no mention of Deal it didn't make the list.  Hopefully it was seriously considered.   

I know it wasn't on the table, but Formby too should be a serious contender.

Ciao

Every voting period I try to push people to see Deal b/c I think 1) It is superior to Rye and 2) It is worthy of the list.  Getting panelists to visit there is not easy given so few go to Kent on a golf trip.  I know the purveyor of this site sees it my way but we are only 2 votes..I'm more interested also to see how high the Cal Club can climb the US list, it is supremely worthy.

Agree on Cal Club. Played there this April and I thought it was as good, if not better than Pasatiempo & Olympic Lake, and better than Spyglass & MPCC Shore.

[Thomas Dai]

Reading this thread and looking at the photos in the initial web-link, has prompted me to wonder what if we built a 10,000 foot high wall around every golf course. No views at all. None.

How many allegedly 'great' and top ranked courses with tremendous views and scenery would still be at the top of the rankings? A ranking based purely on the quality of the golf course, nothing else.

Would Turnberry and Pebble, to name just two top ranked courses with tremendous views, still be highly equally ranked or would less visually attractive courses such as, no offence intended, somewhere like Seaton Carew, a well thought of test of links golf near Hartlepool/Middlesborough in NE England, but from which you can see tall industrial industrial chimneys, chemical plants, dock cranes etc all so high that not even giant redwoods could block them out, suddenly turn into golfing swans overnight.

This is not by the way, intended as a criticism of the quality of golf available at Turnberry or Pebble or Seaton Carew and the like, for there must be other fine tests of golf elsewhere on the globe that also have visually unattractive backdrops, but I can't help feel that views and scenery seem to count for sooo much in course rankings.

Just a thought.

All the best

[Noel Freeman]

Sean, Ran likes hole by hole comparison..
Deal wins 1,2,3,6,10,11,12,17
Rye wins 4,5,7,8,9,13,18
Halves at 14,15,16 (the toughest one to pick is 16)

Deal wins 1 up..

And if you throw in a course you can have a major/amateur on, thats another notch for Deal. I dont care about that but just saying..I cant see your pictures at work but i went back to Frank Pont's site to double check and my memory of those holes is that they are pedestrian--they are good, i wouldnt classify as you as very good but regardless below the levels of 2 and 3 at Deal..if I go hole by hole..

[Jim Colton]

PSA: Golf.com is counting down the top 100's in chunks of photo slides, if you're interested. 76-100 are up today.

[Greg Tallman]

Looks like those dropping from the list were:

Nanea
Chambers Bay
North Berwick
Valley Club
Highland Links

[Sean_A]

Sean, Ran likes hole by hole comparison..
Deal wins 1,2,3,6,10,11,12,17
Rye wins 4,5,7,8,9,13,18
Halves at 14,15,16 (the toughest one to pick is 16)

Deal wins 1 up..

And if you throw in a course you can have a major/amateur on, thats another notch for Deal. I dont care about that but just saying..I cant see your pictures at work but i went back to Frank Pont's site to double check and my memory of those holes is that they are pedestrian--they are good, i wouldnt classify as you as very good but regardless below the levels of 2 and 3 at Deal..if I go hole by hole..

My take
1.   Deal  – both holes have issues, but I like the approach at Deal
2.   Deal  – I like Rye’s 2nd plenty, but  Deal’s is a good humpty bumpty 4
3.   Half – Deal’s hole is well over-rated; the green site yields very predictable results
4.   Rye – no brainer
5.   Rye – no brainer
6.   Half - Very tough call
7.   Rye – tough call though because Deal’s hole is better than appearances suggest
8.   Rye on default – Deal’s hole is very suspect
9.   Half – tough call
Rye +1
10.   Deal – no brainer
11.   Rye – great use of water, Deal’s hole too much like the 9th
12.   Deal – just as I think the hole is over-rated as its all about the green
13.   Rye – no brainer
14.   Half – I don’t care for Deal’s hole, but Rye’s has the weird wood jobs
15.   Half – close call
16.   Deal  - I actually think the holes are quite even, but I will always give over to the fine par 5
17.   Deal
18.   Rye – Deal could win this, but for the green being cut-off.  

Deal +1

All square in the hole to hole matchup.  But I give the edge to Rye because the routing sequence of holes uses the wind and its dunes better than Deal does.  Thats the major limitation with an out n' back routing.

We are very close in our assessments.

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Sean and Tuco

Both Rye and Deal are potential "top 100" material, but so are at least 2-300 courses in the world.  There are 20, maybe 30, courses that stand out from all the rest because they have the same je ne said quois that Lauren Bacall had, but not Audrey Hepburn; Caravaggio had, but not any of the brothers Caracci; the Beatles had, but not the Kinks.  After you pick the top 20-30 golf courses you are just picking nits.

Rich

PS--if you want me to join your pissing contest (or even if not...) I preferred Rye over Deal when I first played the two in 1981, but now prefer Deal to Rye.  Go figure...

rfg

[Craig Disher]

the Beatles had, but not the Kinks.  \
Rich

Rich,
Did you ever try dancing to "A Day in the Life?"

[Rich Goodale]

the Beatles had, but not the Kinks.  \
Rich

Rich,
Did you ever try dancing to "A Day in the Life?"

No, Craig, but neither did I even think of dancing when I fist heard "Celluloid Heroes"......

All the best

Rich "First Saw the Kinks Live in the Grantham Armoury in 1966" Goodale

PS--Littlestone is in that top 2-300 mix too, and if I ever had the choice of the 3 clubs to join, I would follow in the sadly missed footsteps of Jim Goby......

[Sean_A]

Sean and Tuco

Both Rye and Deal are potential "top 100" material, but so are at least 2-300 courses in the world.  There are 20, maybe 30, courses that stand out from all the rest because they have the same je ne said quois that Lauren Bacall had, but not Audrey Hepburn; Caravaggio had, but not any of the brothers Caracci; the Beatles had, but not the Kinks.  After you pick the top 20-30 golf courses you are just picking nits.

Rich

PS--if you want me to join your pissing contest (or even if not...) I preferred Rye over Deal when I first played the two in 1981, but now prefer Deal to Rye.  Go figure...

rfg

Rihc

Of course you are right, but its good to wind Tuco up, not that he needs much winding.

I am not sure about The Kinks not having whatever it is you said.  Sure, the buying public went with you, but then the buying public bought the Spice Girls and Abba.  Go figure.

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

the Beatles had, but not the Kinks.  \
Rich

Rich,
Did you ever try dancing to "A Day in the Life?"

No, Craig, but neither did I even think of dancing when I fist heard "Celluloid Heroes"......

All the best

Rich "First Saw the Kinks Live in the Grantham Armoury in 1966" Goodale

PS--Littlestone is in that top 2-300 mix too, and if I ever had the choice of the 3 clubs to join, I would follow in the sadly missed footsteps of Jim Goby......

And for those of you too young to remember the Kinks and celluloid, click below  and enjoy....

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=celluloid+heroes+youtube&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz35

[MMcCollins]

Mentioned in one of the earlier posts, but the CC of Fairfield is hardly mentioned and its truely spectacular.  I was surprised no one else commented on this.

[Nigel Islam]

Fox Chapel is a pretty cool edition

[Mark Chaplin]

I've played with some well travelled players at Deal recently, many on return visits. The problem with Deal is its too subtle, on a first visit there are no stunning views, massive dunes or outstanding features. The course somewhat like TOC needs a little learning and certainly more than one quick lap and filling in a rating sheet. These guests grew to love the course on second and third rounds.

11 has the only shot of the entire round directly into a prevailing wind.

Sean play 14 off the ladies or blue tee it's a pleasant 160 yards.

The 1st is a drive and a pitch over a dyke to a massive heavily contoured green. I don't know the measure of a good hole only to say in the Amateur Championship I believe 12 matches went to the 19th but only 2 made it to the 20th. A sub 400 yard drive and pitch decided 10 matches, Garrick Porteous made the final with a bogey from the ditch in his semi.

Finally Deal has 8 holes without green side bunkers.

[Sean_A]

Chappers

If Deal is too subtle the world of golf is in trouble.  There are quite a few in your face shots.  Okay, there are no grand dunes and the feel of the place is less than handsome - not helped by the house being stranded across the road, but Deal isn't ugly and there are spots where its very attractive.  I have been banging on at you for yonks to help this situation out by spending some money along the seawall.  That is by far the worst aspect of Deal aesthetically and I can't see why it isn't landscaped much better - especially areas which are not far off playing corridors. 

I agree about #1, the drive is a bit alarming for the first of the day, but the approach is very fine. 

I wouldn't mind playing off the ladies tee at #14.  It sounds a much better fit than having another banger shot when there are plenty of those coming home.  If I can convince my playing partners this weekend to allow those with the honour to choose the tee I may have a shot at giving it a ago.

Ciao   

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean

Maybe Mark just meant it's too subtle for rankers. By definition they are a 'well traveled'  lot. They're not going to park themselves at one course to learn its strengths, failings, charms, and challenges. They're hitting and running.

Deal aside, I think he makes a valid point about subtlety and rankings. As we've discussed on the board before, rankings discourage inaccessible architecture.  Probably the only reason TOC is ranked highly is because essentially golfers are conditioned to like it. If you could take a group of rankers out there for their first round and on a random day, supposing somehow these rankers had never heard of the course before, where do you think they'd rank it?

Exhibit 2 regarding rankers undervaluing the subtle and overvaluing the obvious is the success of Fazio. Starts great gets worse. What's really being ranked - in addition to the rankers' preferences - is one-n-done hit-n-run golf. Because that's the ranking system. Yes, all this probably is less true for the handful of courses universally acknowledged as great.

Anyway, I love this is turning into another Deal thread. I don't understand though why Noel hopes for the course's inclusion in the Top 100. He's just asking for it to be overrun. If it gets the Open then not only will it be overrun, Dr Dawtree will make a visit or three.

[Sean_A]

Mark

Isn't part of the ranking process to acknowledge good design even if it doesn't particularly thrill the ranker?  I can understand a wee cut for whatever reason (we can think of loads to justify our stance), but to dismiss a course because of that issue when it is otherwise an excellent course?  It seems a bit harsh to me.  When I look at my Links 100 it is loaded at the top end with courses I am not overly thrilled about, but so what?  Where is it written that a ranker has to praise what he ranks highly?

Ciao

[Mark Bourgeois]

Sean

That is not my point. My point is subtle architecture is inaccessible architecture: it takes multiple plays to see what's really there. In contrast, architecture that hits you in the face may appear excellent and thrilling at first but one tires of it over multiple plays.

Mark

[Ally Mcintosh]

These last few posts highlight something I agree with and have also indicated about ranking versus subtle architecture...

Rankings used to be done by people who had just played a lot of golf at a lot of great courses... More so now, they are ticked off on a hit 'n' run.

People consistently miss the charms of Portmarnock and with it being removed from big pro championships, it will no doubt fall in the rankings. But there is more great architecture at Portmarnock than many courses the hit 'n' runs would rate above it.

I reckon I would absolutely love Deal having seen the land on photos - it is very near the top of my must sees and I'll make sure it's a three round stop minimum when I eventually get there...

[Sean_A]

Sean

That is not my point. My point is subtle architecture is inaccessible architecture: it takes multiple plays to see what's really there. In contrast, architecture that hits you in the face may appear excellent and thrilling at first but one tires of it over multiple plays.

Mark

Mark

Yes, of course, but isn't all architecture worth talking about the sort you reference?  To really get a grip one needs to play a course in all seasons and with different winds.  That is a tall order for nearly everybody and perhaps one reason in favour if discounting the opinions of one hitters - no matter who they are. 

Ciao

[Noel Freeman]

Mark-

To be silent is not to lose your tongue. On the contrary, it is only through silence that one can discover something new to talk about. One who talked incessantly, without stopping to look and listen, would repeat himself ad nauseam--Alan Watts

I feel like the 2nd part of that quote but I think like the first point.. I'm not sure Deal will ever get on that list.  And does that even matter, composing the list is like purposeless play.  It is just fun to compile and Deal is one of my favorites and having seen most of GB and I over the last 15 years, I joined only that club because of its merits.  I've never seen a tour bus at Deal and hope I never will. Sure the club would be welcoming and friendly to visitors, but it will never see the Open again, maybe the Senior Open or Walker Cup but the men arent coming back.  And I want that open for one selfish reason.. I want to sit on the sea wall on #6 and watch the pros play it..

So all in all, I am just a Don Quixote figure when it comes to Deal.  There really is no place to go with it, I just like to take on windmills- don't even get me started on Royal Hague...

[Steve Lapper]

Sean

Maybe Mark just meant it's too subtle for rankers. By definition they are a 'well traveled'  lot. They're not going to park themselves at one course to learn its strengths, failings, charms, and challenges. They're hitting and running.

Deal aside, I think he makes a valid point about subtlety and rankings. As we've discussed on the board before, rankings discourage inaccessible architecture.  Probably the only reason TOC is ranked highly is because essentially golfers are conditioned to like it. If you could take a group of rankers out there for their first round and on a random day, supposing somehow these rankers had never heard of the course before, where do you think they'd rank it?

Exhibit 2 regarding rankers undervaluing the subtle and overvaluing the obvious is the success of Fazio. Starts great gets worse. What's really being ranked - in addition to the rankers' preferences - is one-n-done hit-n-run golf. Because that's the ranking system. Yes, all this probably is less true for the handful of courses universally acknowledged as great.

Anyway, I love this is turning into another Deal thread. I don't understand though why Noel hopes for the course's inclusion in the Top 100. He's just asking for it to be overrun. If it gets the Open then not only will it be overrun, Dr Dawtree will make a visit or three.

Mark,

   Your presumptions are, at least when applied to GM Panelists, patently false. Folks like Ran, Ben, Tom, Noel, Jeff, Joe et.al. are indeed "well traveled," but hardly "hitting and running" as you proclaim. More of the folks on that panel have years of experience seeing an extremely diverse variety of worldwide venues, ZERO interest in access, and a far greater concern for learning about the architecture of the course they are playing. They also possess a greater appreciation for the nuance of such designs.

  Your "Exhibit 2" is yet another falsehood. I can't speak to the large number of dolts at GD who consistently manage to miss most everything in front them (save for resistance to par), but the GM folks, for the most part, regularly play multiple rounds on whatever course they are considering for ranking. They spend a good deal of time discussing the apparent merits and detriments of what they've seen. For example, the inclusion of Fox Chapel & Milwaukee into the Top 100 US was a result of multiple plays by a good # of panelists.

  I think your blanket, and perhaps misinformed, statements deserve a better qualification or restatement.

Sean,

   You are correct. Personally, I've considered several courses better, purely on their design than on pleasure of play. I'd believe others have done the same .

[Sean_A]

Steve

As with any poll, its nice to know the story behind it.  Rankings are no different.  I would love to be able to read the stories of the rankers, their actual individual rankings with comments on why they are as they are including how many times the courses were played and in what seasons/winds.  That info seems to be a trade secret for some reason, but its highly important in lending credibility to a panel.  I am willing to bet many courses ranked were one and dones or the day and done by a significant number or panelists  Its virtually impossible to expect otherwise.  Just look at guys like Ran and Tom.  A ton of experience across the world board and a ton of experience for a limited number of courses. What I believe happens is that experience is transferred to expect rankers to know what they are seeing in one or two goes.  Do you not think this is the case or are you saying panelists have intimate knowledge of say 250 courses around the world to make judgements?

Ciao

[Mark Bourgeois]

Noel,

Your bona fides are above reproach. The record clearly shows when you hopped on RCP there wasn't so much as a donkey much less a bandwagon to hop on. So no bullshit straight up: I absolutely love it when someone flat-out loves a course, warts and all.

Steve, okay maybe the reason the panel membership apparently is turning over is the editors tired of having to rig the results after the votes are in. But to my jury-pool point, changing who's on the panel is a form of manipulating the results, too. In no way am I questioning the honor, intelligence or capabilities of the individuals. But we are all human and are bound to our own experiences, biases, and beliefs. I think Sean's idea of distinguishing favorites from "greatest" is a noble idea ultimately not possible -- unless one creates a set of criteria so clearly defined and above misinterpretation they create an unescapable straightjacket by which to assess a course.

But in that case all that's been traded are the biases of the group for those of whoever decides the criteria.

These are my opinions although in my defense I am familiar with a few ways to use statistics to lie. 

[Sean_A]

Mark

Isn't part of the point of "favourites" is that there is no justification needed?  Once we use words like " best" and "greatest" then an opinion needs data to support it - if it be an opinion worth anything.  And since its only opinions, the endless go rounds happen about what is best, how is it determined etc etc.  I have always said I am far more interested in favourites lists because

1. I get a sense of what that person values in architecture/ambience/history.

2. The list will be more varied than simply a best of list - which at the end of the day once we can accept raters as knowledgeable - the lists all look the same.  A pointless exercise for the most point.

Ciao