I am saying 'not good' in the same terms as 'isn't great' in the context of the best courses that are in the top 100 (by Golf World). Only two courses are below 6200 yards.
My main point is that courses get marked down for being on the short side. Somewhere like Boat of Garten to me shows this point off perfectly. It is a beautiful course.
Adrian,
Okay, so not good as in any GCA without a top 100 course under their belt is not good Boat of Garten is not only a beautiful course but also a very good though not great course. You seem to have backed into a corner Adrian.
Jon
Jon you need to get yourself checked out, you are not wired up right. I have not backed up at all. Boat of Garten is a great course in my opinion, it is not in the top 100 though and it can only be because it is too short. The Boat is what it is on a great piece of property routed by Braid, but I suppose if some of those 350 yarders were naturally 70 yards more and it was 6500 yards then it would be right up there with the best (i.e Would be better longer). All I am saying is the shorter courses seem to get marked down by the raters. You and the other idiot are mixing things up and cherry picking things out of context. Personally I like short courses but people building new courses tend to use 7000 yards as the yardstick.
Well I was going to take a step back but 'the other idiot' could only have been an insult intended for me.
You are yet again trying to mix up quality with what raters for a magazine think. You happily stated that you thought short was not good before inevitably moving on to confuse that with how raters at GW ranked short courses, implying that the former was a function of the latter. I didn't ask about other people. I asked about YOUR opinion. I honestly don't know now whether you're just a deluded man who thinks he can trick people on this site with an attempt to merge the two or if your mentality is such that you genuinely struggle to distinguish between maximum business exposure and maximum quality. Any which way, I strongly suggest you don't consider a late career in politics or the legal profession as your struggle with cognitive dissonance might be a severe handicap.
Actually, I'm beginning to think there's a cash register where your soul should be. Of course, you'd abandon your faith in 'industry standards' in a second for a couple of Doak 7's and a seat at the top table. You'll always switch your thinking to whatever best nurses your battered ego at any given time.
Jon should probably feel proud that you're now throwing the same "you're not wired right" crap at him which you've thrown at me in the past, all for daring to suggest that the endless and self serving catalogue of metrics you use to justify a bean counting philosophy might not actually be what the game of golf needs.
I really didn't want to bang this drum but clearly someone needs to lay it out loud and clear for you. You are fooling no one. Well, not here anyway.