Yes, the ratings debate is interesting. At Mountain Shadows it has been interesting to follow my clients' email strings about this very subject. One day it is "not an issue" and the next day it "is an issue"!
I think it boils down to two thoughts:
1 - You do have some aging golfers who would like to continue playing, but on a shorter (less time) course. Many of these golfers come from a formal club where they enjoy a full, transportable handicap. I can see their point, even it they are a minority of the players.2 - You have marketing people (especially with a resort) who like the notion of having a rating to show how challenging the course is to guests — and that large group who will occupy rooms. Especially at a "short" course they want to be able to say, "Hey pal, it's no pushover...look, from the back tees the par-54 layout has a rating of 58.3..."For those who do not know, the USGA provides full, transportable handicaps to any 9-hole equivalent of 1,500 yards or more (18-hole equivalent = 3,000 yards). They admit — freely — that anything less than 5,000-yards for 18-holes really does not provide an accurate handicap because the math simply does not always work out when you have very, very short holes and not so many above 350 yards. This came direct from the source!
So, you CAN have a USGA course rating (provided through your local/state association in the U.S.) that is fully transportable between courses and events, IF your course is...
- 6-holes of at least 1,000 yards
- 9-holes of at least 1,500 yards
- 12-holes of at least 2,000 yards
- 18-holes of at least 3,000 yards ...etc
Overall, I agree. Ratings are essentially there for a very few to use literally...but I would submit that they are mostly appreciated for their figurative value...i.e., they provide some context to the golfer, even the casual player, who finds this data a gauge of what course they are going to play, or have just played. Same with SLOPE.
Also, FYI, the USGA does offer a very complex system for a SHORT COURSE RATING and HANDICAP...but the drawback is that this is fundamentally useless as I can see because it relates to nothing in the real world...handicaps or most other courses as a comparison.
http://www.usga.org/handicapping-articles/short-course-handicap-25508.html