[tonyt]

Danny,

I didn't. I rated it higher. If you read the earlier posts that started this theme, I commented that Commonwealth was not unlucky to miss out on being the fifth highest ranked Aussie course, and therefore in the world top 100. That's where the Commonwealth discussion began.

In my last post on the subject, I actually debated the dubious merit of two of the courses ranked equal to it and one ranked above it. If you see this as criticism of Commonwealth, you have unquestionably misunderstood me.

Bear in mind, I last saw the course prior to the controversial changes that most Commonwealth fans seem to dislike, AND when the course was in better condition than now. Any innaccuracy on my part because I haven't recently been there can only be unfairly in favour of it.

I have admittedly (at the expense of objective accuracy) fallen into line with what I have heard. And I hear nothing but negative comments on the changes and conditioning. And from a number of people who's opinion I respect who see the course extremely often. For that I apologise.

[Chris Kane]

James Livingstone,
I don't think Commonwealth is unlucky to miss out on world top 100 status: it isn't anywhere close to that at this point in time.  It isn't in Australia's top 10, let alone top 5.

Fully restored, and with 30% of the trees removed, it will undoubtably be a serious contender for the list!

What I object to is tonyt saying that the course struggles to maintain a position in Australia's top 20-25, which is a) absolute rubbish, whatever you think of the changes, and b) not a comment he is qualified to make, because he hasn't seen the course in its current guise.

Woodlands might feel hard done by, but its a hard for me to say that, when I havn't played any of the overseas courses on the list.  Perhaps someone who has played a few of the courses at the bottom end of the list (70-100) might be able to comment on Woodlands standing in that league.  Mike Clayton and Paul Daley are both right though: Woodlands is a superior course to Commonwealth as I write this.

[tonyt]

Forget Commonwealth struggling. I'm struggling with the concept that every Commonwealth member I have ever met states that the course changes have weakened the course's claims in the rankings, and that I last played the course when it was deserving of a higher ranking than it is now. And yet I'm being attacked for being critical of the course? I don't understand.

Apart from the fact that part of my comments earlier were not relying on local knowledge, because in some instances, I was merely quoting the two Australian rankings, which have been formed with no input from me whatsoever.

[tonyt]

And Chris, I say again, my major point in raising Commonwealth in the first place, is exactly what you also just said in your last post. That it is not in line to become the fifth Australian course to adorn the world list.

My quoting of the Aussie rankings and mentioning it as sliding to 19th place was merely to illustrate that my opinion of it not being top 5 is not a controversial one. It was not designed to give the impression that it is a lowly course or a lost cause. If I did, I unreservedly apologise.

[Chris Kane]

tony,
You'll never understand.  Why even bother trying to explain it to you?

[James_Livingston]

tonyt
I know a guy at Commonwealth who can get us on.  Top bloke as well.

Chris
Whether Commonwealth is 15 or 25, that's not really any reason to give tonyt such a kicking.  Afterall, if Commonwealth maintains its current trend in the rankings, it WILL be out of the top 30 in 2012.  It is also not hard to see most golf course rankers finding 20+ courses they prefer to Commonwealth.  You would disagree, and cite the two raters whose style you seek to emulate, but the reality is that a couple of raters didn't even rate Commonwealth in their top 25, and most of the rest not very highly either, so any contention that it struggles to maintain a position in the top 25 has a strong basis in fact.  Your last insult, "You'll never understand.  Why even bother trying to explain it to you?" also displays a remarkable degree of condescension, given tony has displayed a great deal of knowledge and experience of the game and belongs to one of the most revered golfing clans in Victorian amateur golf history.

[Paul_Turner]

GOLF usually list the courses that nearly made the lists.  Anyone got those?  Thanks.

Multiple course clubs usually have one course that suffers from the rankings.  For example, Sunningdale New is as good as the Old, but never quite makes the World 100:  it's always on the "nearly" list.

[Matt_Ward]

I think it's important for people to remember that a number of courses in the USA are extremely good but sometimes don't meet the standard of being the high very elite. The answer is quite simple -- the demands of being THAT GOOD are rare for courses to meet.

Take for example a number of courses in the GAP (Phillie area / not counting the Jersey side) section. There are without doubt no less tyhan half a dozen layouts that are extremely good and certainly way above average. In my opinion -- only Merion (East) deserves immediate selection in the top 100. Yes, there are other candidates (Arnonimink, Huntington Valley, to a lesser extent Rolling Green and Lehigh).

Unfortunately, a number of people make the mistake in thinking that if there course isn't a top 100 course it must be dog meat. That is nonsense. The GAP area is one place where many people throughout the USA need to spend some time and see what is there. At the same time I believe it's no less important for people to also realize that modern golf today has produced a number of superb layoouts (Kingsley Club, Black Mesa, Paa-Ko Ridge, Ocean Hammock, Olde Kinderhook, to name just a few) that are worthy additions to my top 100 preferences.

What amazes me is that few people really do the due diligence to see what is truly happening with the new additions while at the same time weeding out the hanger-ons from the "classics" that are simply taking advantage of their proximity to other more deserving candidates -- hint hint Maidstone and Shoreacres, to name just two.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Matt, if you're not in the Top 100, you're dogmeat when it comes to attracting people trying to carve notches in their belts. That is one of the greatest failings of course rankings - for many people, you're either in or you're out. Discussion of the relative merits of courses has nothing to do with it.

To our Aussie friends - your discussion of Commonwealth intrigues me greatly. As some of you know I'm coming to Australia in November, and on the basis of Doak's "Gourmet's Choice" ranking I'd originally pencilled in Commonwealth as a must-play, but now I'm gathering that it's far from a foregone conclusion. Within the constraints of a time-limited trip, is there another course you'd substitute in Commonwealth's place? (I'm particularly interested in seeing different types of golf...my impression is that the great Sand Belt courses may in their general style feel quite similar to one another, unlike, say, the courses at The National, or New South Wales. Is Portsea similar in feel to Kingston Heath and Victoria, for example?)

Cheers,
Darren

[Chris Kane]

Darren,
As I've said to you in a couple of messages, with time-constraints in mind, the two courses at RM and Kingston Heath are the only "must plays".  After that you'd play Woodlands, Victoria and Commonwealth, in that order of preference.

Portsea is nothing like the sandbelt courses, nor are the courses at the National or NSW.

[ian]

Could someone please pass me on the Canadian courses or course that made the top 100.

St. George's ?
Highland Golf Links ?
Hamilton ?

[Joe Andriole]

Chris Kane - I really enjoy your posts.  I visited Oz for a few weeks this year and played a fair amount of golf.  I'm convinced of the preeminence of RM and KH and greatly enjoyed the Sandbelt courses.  I think that Metropolitan is terrific and a notch above Victoria and Commonwealth; I missed Woodlands.  In another state, I don't understand the lofty rating of R Adelaide and can not conceive that it is top 50 in the world.  Your thoughts please.

[Chris Kane]

JGAndriole,
Thank you for your kind comments.

I'm not convinced that Metropolitan is as good as it gets credit for, but thats the beauty of GCA: there are no right answers!  I'd certainly rank it behind Woodlands and Victoria.  But that said, a number of people with opinions I respect - like Paul Daley - rate it very highly.

Royal Adelaide?  It would be very hypocritical for me to make any comments, as I'm even less qualified to talk about RA than tonyt is to talk about Commonwealth!  The closest I've come to it was driving past it four years ago!  Hopefully I'll get over there at the end of semester: by all accounts it is a must-play.

[RJ_Daley]

Sorry, too much time to read this whole thread, so maybe it has already been said....

Trouble with the top 100 is it need 200 courses on it to make it credible.  It is hard for me to comment much because I haven't seen a big enough sampling of top 100s.  But, my suggestion is pairing up archies courses of similar ilk.  For example, Yeaman's Hall gets on the list, but Blue Mound doesn't.  Seth should have these 2 count for one place so both gets proper recognition.  As far as I'm concerned, Kiawah and Whistling are of similar ilk, and while I think KIaway is a bit better, they could hold a place in the list without one cancelling the other out and leaving mores slots for other deserving courses.  I'd pair BWR River and Harbour Town as one also.  Sand Hills can have Friars Head as its mate.  Make Crystal Downs and Valley Club and Scarlet a trio.

I know, I know, but I'm all full of beer after our 4 day county tournament...

[Mike Worth]

 

Matt Ward.

Given your shock that Hidden Creek made the list, do you think it is because of its proximity to Philly area courses, and Pine Valley, etc.  Your post above seems to suggest that some courses might make the rankings  in this manner.

Word "on the street" is you weren't overwhelmed with Hidden Creek, and you thought it might be too short (big surprise there)

[Jim Franklin]

Matt -

What didn't you like about Hidden Creek? A friend of mine played it and said he rated it a 4 because the greens were so big. Can you rate a course so low only because the greens were too big? I don't know.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Hurricane,

I (a non-rater) really liked Hidden Creek. However, if we go back to Doak's game of only being able to replace courses on the list that we have played with courses that we have played that are not on the list, I would replace it with Huntingdon Valley. This is not a shot at HC, just a plug for the very solid 18 holes of HV.
My partner that day, who I often agree with his views, saw the course as Top 25 Jersey course, but not Top 100.

[Scratch_Nathan]

Ian -

Two Canadian Courses on GOLF MAGAZINE's World list:

Highlands Links 64 (up from 69)
St. George's 95 (up from 96)

[Matt_Ward]

SS1:

Length -- or the relative lack thereof wasn't a consideration in my thinking on Hidden Creek. Look -- there are people who rate courses simply because of who designed a particular layout. I said this before -- it's the "star" syndrome. I don't give courses / layouts bonus points because "x" architect did the course. Do I believe others look at courses this way and rate them because of it -- absolutely.

How can one explain the omission of the courses listed below --

Black Mesa (NM)
Paa-Ko Ridge (NM)
Olde Kinderhook (NY)
Ocean Hammock (FL)
The Kingsley Club (MI)

I can name a few others ...

Each one of these courses is relatively new (just like Hidden Creek) but in the case of Black Mesa you have a Baxter Spann design, Paa-Ko Ridge has Ken Dye and The Kingsley Club has Mike DeVries. Do people give these gentlemen the time of day regarding their efforts? Few do -- most don't.

I enjoy Crenshaw & Coore designs but there are quite a few people on GCA and elsewhere who are smitten with these guys (and I hasten to add I do enjoy some of their layouts as well) that if they designed just about anything you would these same folks fawning over them.

Hidden Creek is a fine course -- I will likely see it again later this year and I will see what, if anything, I missed from my first visit. However, I know my home state quite well and when I see such distinguished layouts as Plainfield only finsihing at #66 and Hollywood is not even included I have to shake my head and question what people are looking at.

The State of NJ is so competitive that I don't see Hidden Creek in the top ten -- much less a top 100 position. Like I said I'll be seeing the course again and I will see if my initial reaction was on target or needs to be adjusted. We shall see.

Mr. Hurricane:

I'm on the road right now and I will post a more detailed response to your question later. My quick question to you -- how do you see the course versus the others that exist in NJ. Can you truthfully say HC is among the top ten?

[Mike Vegis @ Kiawah]

In case you were wondering, here is the list of the panel members:

George Bedard - Canada
Judy Bell - Colorado
Prakash Bhandari - India
Michel Bonallack - Scotland
Malcolm Campbell - Scotland
Bob Charles - New Zealand
Tom Clasby - Calif.
Tom Crow - Calif.
Robet e. Cupp - Georgia
Robert M. Currey - Mass.
Gordon Dalgleish - Georgia
Michael R. Davis - NJ
John R. Dempsey - NC
Tom Doak - Michigan
Joann Dost - Calif
James J. Dunne III - NY
Pete Dye - Fla
David B. Fay - NJ
Jim Finegan - Penn
Marvin A. Franch - Oregon
Dana Fry - Ohio
Mary Galyean - Florida
Christopher Goodwin - Canada
Kendra Graham - NJ
John Harris - Minn
Gary Hart - Ariz
Phillipe P. Hermann - Switzerland
Alan Heuer - NY
Arthur Hills - OH
Richard G. Hills - England
Bill Hogan - Calif.
tony Jacklin - england
Peter Jacobsen - Oregon
Terry Jastrow - Calif
Bill Jones III - Georgia
Rees Jones - NJ
Robert Trend Jones Jr. - Calif
Sunil Kappagoda - Conn
Taizo Kawata - Japan
James Keegan - Colorado
Ortwin Klang - Germany
Norman Klaparda - Calif
Samm Klaparda - Calif
Mike Klemme - Okla
Herbert V. Kohler Jr. - Wisc
Henry Kravis - NY
Jeff Lewis - NY
Joe Luigs - Indiana
David Mackintosh - Argentina
Thomas McBroom - Canada
Peter McEvoy - England
Thomas J. Meeks - NJ
Brian Morgan - Scotland
Ran Morrissett - NC
Jay Mottola - NY
Jack Nicklaus - Fla
Masa Nishijima - Japan
Frank Nobilo - New Zealand
Kazunori Ohtsuka - Japan
Peter Oosterhuis - England
Arnold Palmer - Penn
John Paramor - England
Harrie P.W. Perkins - Texas
Hal Phillips - Maine
Gary Player - South Africa
Tom Ramsey - Australia
Like Reese - Illinois
Cabell Robinson - Spain
Michael C. Roseto - NJ
Lorne Rubenstein - Canada
Pat Ruddy - Ireland
Mitsutaka Sado - Japan
Isao Sato - Japan
Bill Shean - Illinois
David V. Smith - Calif
Annika Sorenstam - Sweden
Donald Steel - England
George Sweda - Ohio
Charles H. Tadge - Ohio
Oliver A. Thompson - Ohio
Sho Tobari - Japan
Daniel C. Ulmer Jr. - Kentucky
Fred Vuich - Penn
Tom Weiskopf - Arizone
Mike Wolveride - Australia
Walter Woods - Scotland

[Scott_Burroughs]

Hmm.  No more TV celebs, Matt Lauer and Bryant Gumbel.  Already knew that Bob McCoy got the boot.  Interesting that Herb Kohler is on the list now...

But I do recognize another non-famous name on that list (other than Ran and his in-law).....  

[THuckaby2]

Who's Ran's in-law - Mr. Luigs?  Who's the other person we should know?  Jeff Lewis?

The guy I know is Bill Hogan (great guy, my brother's college room-mate, owns and runs Wide World of Golf travel company based in Carmel, CA); he bought the company from Michael Roseto, who remains on the panel also....

TH

[Mike Benham]

Hmm.  No more TV celebs, Matt Lauer and Bryant Gumbel.  Already knew that Bob McCoy got the boot.  Interesting that Herb Kohler is on the list now...

Terry Jastrow is married to Anne Archer and is credited as an actor and director.  I don't know if this is the same Terry Jastrow that was the ABC Sports Producer, primarily golf.

[Jim Franklin]

Matt -

Thanks for the update and I look forward to your comments about HC. I, unfortunately, have not played a lot of golf in New Jersey, but have played Pine Valley, Baltusrol(both), Galloway National, ACCC, Metedeconk and some of the higher end public places so I cannot comment on top 10 in the state. I enjoyed my round at HC, but do not know if it is top  100 quality. I really think C/C are very talented. HC isn't in the same ballpark with Sand Hills or Friars Head though.

[Mike Worth]

Matt Ward.

Thanks for the thoughful response.  I'm not sure what you may have missed or not missed when you came to Hidden Creek last May.  However, some may take issue with your characterization of Hidden Creek's "lack thereof (length)".  Realizing the difficulty of capturing the essence of course in one visit, Hidden Creek is sufficient in length.  At 6,900 yards, par 71, it's hard to argue the course is short (this and one of the par 3s is only 110 yards long).  As others on this website have pointed out, we all don't hit the ball 330 yards.  And length isn't everything - there is much, much more to Hidden Creek than length.  Your rant against Hidden Creek seems to be as much a protest against the popularity of certain architects, who according to you, get "bonus points" in the ratings process (as well as certain courses getting bonus points for being located near other great courses).  It might seem that you are penalizing Hidden Creek just because there are alot of Coore/Crenshaw fans out there and that offends your sense of fair play.  Saying that Hidden Creek is not even in the top 10 in New Jersey seems to be a harsh statement - this coming on the heels of NJ Golfer's supercillious ranking of Twisted Dune as the #1 public course in New Jersey over clearly better courses, such as Ballyowen and Blue Herron Pines East and Architects Club.   One still gets the feeling in reading your comments that you are surpised by Hidden Creek's ranking to the point where it seems the panel didn't clear it with the self-described person in charge of golf course rankings in New Jersey.  Hope that isn't the case.  

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()