How do you decide one course is better than another?

[Jason Topp]

Participating in the Minnesota Top 30 thread got me thinking about my methodology for rating courses.  I can only conclude it is pretty arbitrary.


My first thought about each course might have a bit to do with its architectual quality but usually has to do with something else - the vibe of the membership, the setting, particularly enjoyable or unpleasant rounds or whether or not the course is highly thought of by others


 Focusing on the architecture, I tend to have an overall impression and then think about details.  It could well be the case that my view of the details is clouded by my overall impression.


How do you approach it? 

[/size][size=78%]  [/size]

[PCCraig]

Jason,


A great question.


A while back when we were ranking our own person Top 10 in Minnesota 1-10, I put a clause in there that any course could, in theory, move up or down 3 spots depending on my day or mood. Is White Bear "better" than Interlachen? Not really, just different.


My favorite courses tend to have certain holes that I am always excited to play, regardless of the conditions or how I am playing. Holes like the 11th and 12th at White Bear, the stretch of 13-14-15 at Northland, and the 13th at Interlachen come to mind. When golf course architectural "science" fails, I always fall back on how many holes does the course have that I truly get excited to play?


There are certain places that just have terrific "vibes." Those places are always fun to visit and it might positively affect the overall experience, but that rarely has an effect on its course being held to a higher esteem in my book.

[Ian Andrew]

Whether some aspect moves me emotionally. Whether I'm scared, thrilled, challenged, enlightened or ideally surprised. That's all I look for now. It's why I want a little "upheaval" in my favourite art form right now.

[Mark Kiely]

For me, courses I really love tend to be those that sort of ingrain themselves in my brain immediately. What I mean by that is that after just one round, I can retrace the entire course in my mind quickly. (Not every nuance, but general routing, where the hole goes, etc.) What causes this is distinctive holes. The harder it is for me to recall the routing and individual holes, the lesser I think of a course.


(I feel like this is somewhat obvious, but it plays a big factor in how I tend to rank courses. It's also a bit of a "chicken or the egg" dilemma... Do I easily remember the course because it's so good, or does it appeal to me because I can easily remember it?)

[V_Halyard]

Jason Great post for pondering.

1: I enjoy a walk where every hole requires you to make a plan from the green, back to the first shot. I'm not an effective bomber and gouger so I have to enjoy plotting my way to the pin.

2: Pondering how well the course is laid into the land by the architect. Does the story told by the architect match the geography? 
Waterfalls and babbling brooks in arid Southern California - not so much

3:Does the course's story deliver lasting impressions.
For example:
"I birdied number 2”  vs.
"I ran it down the hill and up the left side between the ridge and the fringe to birdie Number 2."
Same outcome, different visceral journeys.

[Jason Topp]

I understand that we all have our preferences for a great golf course but my question is more specific.  If you decide one course is better than another, how do you make that decision?


It helps to think of an example where the decision is tough.  For example for those that participated in the Midwest Mashie - how would you analyze whether Davenport or Cedar Rapids CC is the better course?  In MInnesota the choice could be between Interlachen and Minikahda.  In California it could be Pebble v. Cypress Point.  In Arizona it could be Estancia v. one of the Whisper Rock courses.


The task becomes more difficult to justify when dealing with a course with which I have a particular attachment. I would probably rather play Oak Ridge than any other course in Minnesota.  I have a close attachment to the course.  In trying to think of a way to compare Oak Ridge to other courses by well-known designers in the area, I have a difficult time coming up with a defensible methodology for doing so.   

[Tom_Doak]

I get asked this question in interviews all the time - whether it's about my books, my courses, or the rankings.  I answered it this morning in an interview.


In the end, it's subjective, and Jason you have it absolutely right that your overall impression tends to cloud the details.  You can see this clearly when GOLF DIGEST prints the results of its top 100 voting in the different categories ... the best courses also [generally] finish high among the most beautiful, the best conditioned, and the best shot values.  Resistance to scoring is the only category where the individual scores don't seem pegged to the general ranking of the course.

There is no "defensible methodology," really.  It's just a matter of opinion.  Rankings are a consensus of individual opinions, and nothing more, no matter how much they pretend to be otherwise.
What you've all described as your "emotional reaction" to the course is also the impression of it that prints to your brain, and the courses which make such a strong impression tend to do the best in the rankings.  One great hole is usually not enough, but a great stretch of holes is golden here, or any feature of the course that sets it apart from everything else.  The bunkers at Woodhall Spa or Ganton are so striking that it pushes them ahead of another course with more variety and better terrain, like Hollinwell (Notts).

[Ira Fishman]

A great question to which I have no good answer.  For me, the controlled experiment is Pine Needles and Mid Pines.  Across the road from each other, literally, and we play both at least once on every visit.  Some visits, I leave thinking one is better than the other.  But is that because of the course or the fact that on the day we played Mid Pines, the sky was pure Carolina Blue so that the drinks overlooking the 18th are that more memorable?  Or is it because Pine Needles seems more open and free?


I think it is pretty easy to assess very good versus not good, but very good versus very good is really difficult.


Ira

[Peter Pallotta]

Jason, indeed a very good question. Tom D and Ira will have preempted (and trumped) me, but:

I've often been told by the leading lights around here that I can't and shouldn't even try to separate out and judge/rate the "pure architecture" from the course as a whole, or its "design" from its surroundings; and I've been told by the leading and lesser lights both that, as an average golfer, I should be looking for & appreciating "fun" instead of the thrilling and near-relentless challenge that I (mistakenly, I suppose) equate with a great round of golf. 

Now, I'll grant that with so little experience and knowledge I have no business trying to focus on design/architecture 'in and of itself' and divorced from all manner of bells and whistles, from sandy vista to ocean views; and I'll even grant that I'm being foolhardy as an average golfer in looking for meaningful 'tests' instead of chummy 'fun'; but, granting those, then I honestly don't know how to decide/make heads or tails of which course is better than another.

What I'm left with is merely this: the course that rates as better in my books will be more attractive, in just the precise way that I myself *happen* to find attractive; and it will be an easier and more flowing walk, for *me* in particular - a broken down never-was; and the shots that are required will be of a kind and variety well suited to a 14 handicapper who (perversely) still wants to be asked to work the ball like a scratch golfer.

And what kind of standard (for genuine/useful comparison) is that? I mean, I know Tom D argues (often persuasively) that it's all "subjective" -- but man, in the context of a discussion board like this one, that's *too* subjective for my tastes. It would be as if you said "I like vanilla ice cream" and I said "Yeah, vanilla is good, and I eat it sometimes, but I prefer chocolate, as it's more chocolatey", and you replied "Yeah, I like chocolate too sometimes, but most of the time, for an everyday dessert, I prefer vanilla" and I said "Understood - as long as it's not the corporate vanilla or chocolate" and you said "Oh yeah, of course -- I only want pure vanilla or chocolate" and I say "Yes, I agree, but it's all subjective".         

Ah, okay, as social club discussion that's fine, preferably if there is also drinking involved -- as I do like hearing different opinions from different people with different backgrounds and experiences. But I thought we were exploring true *greatness* here. I mean, were the Dark Ages of gca only dark for Ran, subjectively speaking? If so, I've been misinformed, or misguided, or both...

Or to put it more briefly and in the form of a question: Is the only 'objective' assessment of greatness or relative quality one that emerges when a large enough (and loud enough) number of individual subjects happen to agree on their 'subjective' views?

And even if we answer 'yes', do we really believe that? I mean, *really*. Or don't we all, when push comes to shove, have more than a little of Pat M in us -- who, when his high 'opinion' about a highly-regarded golf course was in any way challenged, demanded to know how many times you'd played the course and in how many different weather conditions, so as to demonstrate that he was 'right' and that your opinion couldn't be anything but 'wrong'.   

[Sean_A]

I am not fussed about which courses are best, but I have gone through the process a few times.  I never feel completely satisfied with the results so something isn't right about the process.  I am not sure the process will ever feel right, but I reckon I will come as close as possible after ranking courses I know fairly well several times over the course of 6-10 years. One play is usually enough to figure out very roughly where a course belongs compared to others, but it usually takes me 3-5 plays over several years to get a good handle on things.  I think this is why I just lose interest...its too damn hard to try to eliminate subjectivity and I am not sure what the point is. 

The things I look for are fairly straight-forward

greens
use of natural/pre-existing features features
man-made features
topography, turf & soil
the walk
conditioning
beauty/views
variety
great/interesting/bold/unusual holes

Courses don't need all the above or sometimes a course can excell so well in a few categories that this is enough to overcome some obvious shortcomings. I will say variety goes a long way in my book!  It is difficult for a course to have variety and not be good.

The above is no different when considering my favourites except that I will add other things which keep me happy such as history, clubhouse, affordability and more esoterically the vibe of a course. 

Ciao

[Derek_Duncan]

I am not fussed about which courses are best, but I have gone through the process a few times.  I never feel completely satisfied with the results so something isn't right about the process.  I am not sure the process will ever feel right, but I reckon I will come as close as possible after ranking courses I know fairly well several times over the course of 6-10 years. One play is usually enough to figure out very roughly where a course belongs compared to others, but it usually takes me 3-5 plays over several years to get a good handle on things.  I think this is why I just lose interest...its too damn hard to try to eliminate subjectivity and I am not sure it is worth doing. 

Sean,


It works slightly differently for me.


Yes, I'm of like mind that upon first play I have a pretty good idea where the course "fits." And since I don't replay a good many of the courses I see, that first impression is where it's left and that's what I have to be comfortable with.


But when I have the opportunity to play a course numerous times over a period of months or years, my conclusions usually cloud rather than clarify.


Either from comfort, expectation, past experiences, learning how to best play the holes or whatnot, I find the more familiar I am with a course the more I accepting I am of its flaws. Familiarity breeds a certain level of fondness and I become less critical.

Of course, this only applies to courses that aren't legitimately excellent. I haven't had the chance to replay on a regular basis courses that would rank among the very best.

[Jim Sherma]

Upon playing a course my thought experiment is as follows:


If the course was maintained similar to a decent but not great muni how would I or others view it?


Based on this line of thinking I try to distill what’s on the ground with whether or not I want to keep playing the architecture itself. The question as to the club and day out aspect are completely different. There are fabulous clubs with good courses that IMO get vastly overrated based on the club atmosphere and course conditioning.

[Thomas Dai]

The extent, presupposing logistics/money available, to which I wish to return is usually the starting point.
atb

[Tim Gallant]

My first thought about each course might have a bit to do with its architectual quality but usually has to do with something else - the vibe of the membership, the setting, particularly enjoyable or unpleasant rounds or whether or not the course is highly thought of by others


Focusing on the architecture, I tend to have an overall impression and then think about details.  It could well be the case that my view of the details is clouded by my overall impression.


How do you approach it? 

[size=78%]  [/size]

Jason,


I was giving this some thought. I do believe that we do consider the architectural side of things when we are deciding which course is better, but maybe more important than that, I believe we look to see if the architectural style matches up with what we like best.


For example, if we enjoy courses that are of the strategic school, then those courses that exhibit those traits in more abundance tend to get ranked higher in our mind's eye as 'better'. I find it most difficult to look at the architectural intention of the course and judging it accordingly. From there, one can apply the necessary filters as one would like.


Just a thought.

[Sean_A]

My first thought about each course might have a bit to do with its architectual quality but usually has to do with something else - the vibe of the membership, the setting, particularly enjoyable or unpleasant rounds or whether or not the course is highly thought of by others


Focusing on the architecture, I tend to have an overall impression and then think about details.  It could well be the case that my view of the details is clouded by my overall impression.


How do you approach it? 

Jason,


I was giving this some thought. I do believe that we do consider the architectural side of things when we are deciding which course is better, but maybe more important than that, I believe we look to see if the architectural style matches up with what we like best.

Just a thought.

I try hard not to fall into the trap of looking for things I like and simply see what is there. I usually find courses that are very good, but not quite the highest echelons, to be lacking in variety.  The biggest culprits are over-bunkering (serious bug bear of mine for 15 years!) killing variety, terrain which is extremely flat or hilly, a poor walk, or there simply aren't enough great holes.

Ciao

[Jeff Schley]

This is very subjective certainly, thus the collective opinion is hard to capture without ratings of members, but discussion is tough to classify.  Having said that I think of a hotel.  If we think of a hotel and why we rank one over the other, there are other things not associated with the actual room that either make it good or not in our minds.  Golf course architecture is like the room you have at the hotel, the hard product you want to focus on.  But a hotel, like a golf course have other things that matter when considering which course you prefer over another. 5 star hotels are all about services and amenities above and beyond of a nice room. Golf courses I would argue are similar.

One of the first things I think of as a non-millionaire is what cost did i outlay for this hotel room or round of golf?  I instantly love it more when I think I got a good deal on the room, or maybe a friend is hosting me at his private club. Not the primary objective, but to me it matters in how I value the experience.

For a course is there some golf history there?  Is it private, which gives an air of exclusivity? I have anticipation if those are in place for example, like Christmas is coming.

Upon arrival is there a welcoming environment with bag drop, staff welcoming you and directing you for the next stage of your journey. Is there a clubhouse that has amenities that you can change your shoes and shower and relax after your round with a drink? Major priorities maybe not, but that really adds to the experience IMO.

Is there a nice restaurant/bar to have a quick breakfast/lunch before the round? Love doing this and then leisurely going to the driving range to warm up and then hit a few putts to get the feel for the greens. Are the balls pyramided and staff looking after the range? Big deal no, attention to detail yes!

If I'm getting a caddie it is nice to have the caddie with you on the range to get a feel for your game and talk to make the next 4 hour enjoyable together. I love getting a caddie and helps add to the experience tremendously, especially for courses I haven't played previously.

I really enjoy a welcoming starter, with water, tees, cards, pencils, ball marks, towels ect available at the first tee.  This sets the tone for the group and prefer an old vet who can talk a quick story or joke to make you feel special and anchors some history of the course or area.

We haven't even gotten to the course and play yet, some are rolling their eyes and have given up even reading this because we are architecture purists right?  Well sorry I view it like a great date with a women there is more to it than did you score!

I listed my preferences of essentials in another thread, which I enjoy as many of them can be combined into my course that day I tend to enjoy more.

Love having a halfway house that is well stocked with whatever drink/food//snack you need that can be ready quickly to not hold anyone up.  It has been 2 hours so nice to relax and enjoy a drink/snack here.

I usually golf with my dad and brother on golf trips and we always take a photo together somewhere, thus I have to get one of these at an opportune moment and location for this course.

Upon completion I like to leave my bag and know it will be taken to the bag drop for collection after and flip a tip to the caddie and off to the locker room to shower and change.  Head to the bar to catch a game on TV and some talk BS after our round.

I can say the one aspect I don't enjoy is feeling like every point of service you have to give a tip to the person. This is the same at some hotels, and prefer to give tips collectively when possible. One for clubhouse staff, one for caddie, one for restaurant staff. Just a pet peeve of mine as I am a good tipper, but when one guy takes my clubs out of my car, then another puts them on a cart I don't want to have to give each guy 2-3 bucks or feel obligated.

So in summation for me there is more to enjoying a course than the actual architecture as illustrated, although shooting a career best round would help!

[Derek_Duncan]

Upon arrival is there a welcoming environment with bag drop, staff welcoming you and directing you for the next stage of your journey. Is there a clubhouse that has amenities that you can change your shoes and shower and relax after your round with a drink? Major priorities maybe not, but that really adds to the experience IMO.

Is there a nice restaurant/bar to have a quick breakfast/lunch before the round? Love doing this and then leisurely going to the driving range to warm up and then hit a few putts to get the feel for the greens. Are the balls pyramided and staff looking after the range? Big deal no, attention to detail yes!

If I'm getting a caddie it is nice to have the caddie with you on the range to get a feel for your game and talk to make the next 4 hour enjoyable together. I love getting a caddie and helps add to the experience tremendously, especially for courses I haven't played previously.

I really enjoy a welcoming starter, with water, tees, cards, pencils, ball marks, towels ect available at the first tee....

I generally downgrade a course for all this stuff. The more money a club/course spends on things not related to the golf, the more I try to avoid it.


I'm having a hard time thinking of courses that offer all of this that actually have a great golf and aren't extremely overpriced. Resorts are another matter since their purpose is to sleep and feed guests.


Bag drops are the worst thing to ever happen to golf.

[Sean_A]

Upon arrival is there a welcoming environment with bag drop, staff welcoming you and directing you for the next stage of your journey. Is there a clubhouse that has amenities that you can change your shoes and shower and relax after your round with a drink? Major priorities maybe not, but that really adds to the experience IMO.

Is there a nice restaurant/bar to have a quick breakfast/lunch before the round? Love doing this and then leisurely going to the driving range to warm up and then hit a few putts to get the feel for the greens. Are the balls pyramided and staff looking after the range? Big deal no, attention to detail yes!

If I'm getting a caddie it is nice to have the caddie with you on the range to get a feel for your game and talk to make the next 4 hour enjoyable together. I love getting a caddie and helps add to the experience tremendously, especially for courses I haven't played previously.

I really enjoy a welcoming starter, with water, tees, cards, pencils, ball marks, towels ect available at the first tee....

I generally downgrade a course for all this stuff. The more money a club/course spends on things not related to the golf, the more I try to avoid it.

I'm having a hard time thinking of courses that offer all of this that actually have a great golf and aren't extremely overpriced. Resorts are another matter since their purpose is to sleep and feed guests.

Bag drops are the worst thing to ever happen to golf.

There is no way I would downgrade a course for the bells and whistles, but I would rather not pay for that stuff.  Generally speaking, the leaner the off course operation the better for promoting a low key experience which is something I generally prefer.  The real classy places pull off the low key and lean ambience when you know damn well the membership and/or club is swimming in cash...at its core...this is really where English golf at the top level excells.

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

I just threw up in my mouth....

[Tim Gallant]

This is very subjective certainly, thus the collective opinion is hard to capture without ratings of members, but discussion is tough to classify.  Having said that I think of a hotel.  If we think of a hotel and why we rank one over the other, there are other things not associated with the actual room that either make it good or not in our minds.  Golf course architecture is like the room you have at the hotel, the hard product you want to focus on.  But a hotel, like a golf course have other things that matter when considering which course you prefer over another. 5 star hotels are all about services and amenities above and beyond of a nice room. Golf courses I would argue are similar.

One of the first things I think of as a non-millionaire is what cost did i outlay for this hotel room or round of golf?  I instantly love it more when I think I got a good deal on the room, or maybe a friend is hosting me at his private club. Not the primary objective, but to me it matters in how I value the experience.

For a course is there some golf history there?  Is it private, which gives an air of exclusivity? I have anticipation if those are in place for example, like Christmas is coming.

Upon arrival is there a welcoming environment with bag drop, staff welcoming you and directing you for the next stage of your journey. Is there a clubhouse that has amenities that you can change your shoes and shower and relax after your round with a drink? Major priorities maybe not, but that really adds to the experience IMO.

Is there a nice restaurant/bar to have a quick breakfast/lunch before the round? Love doing this and then leisurely going to the driving range to warm up and then hit a few putts to get the feel for the greens. Are the balls pyramided and staff looking after the range? Big deal no, attention to detail yes!

If I'm getting a caddie it is nice to have the caddie with you on the range to get a feel for your game and talk to make the next 4 hour enjoyable together. I love getting a caddie and helps add to the experience tremendously, especially for courses I haven't played previously.

I really enjoy a welcoming starter, with water, tees, cards, pencils, ball marks, towels ect available at the first tee.  This sets the tone for the group and prefer an old vet who can talk a quick story or joke to make you feel special and anchors some history of the course or area.

We haven't even gotten to the course and play yet, some are rolling their eyes and have given up even reading this because we are architecture purists right?  Well sorry I view it like a great date with a women there is more to it than did you score!

I listed my preferences of essentials in another thread, which I enjoy as many of them can be combined into my course that day I tend to enjoy more.

Love having a halfway house that is well stocked with whatever drink/food//snack you need that can be ready quickly to not hold anyone up.  It has been 2 hours so nice to relax and enjoy a drink/snack here.

I usually golf with my dad and brother on golf trips and we always take a photo together somewhere, thus I have to get one of these at an opportune moment and location for this course.

Upon completion I like to leave my bag and know it will be taken to the bag drop for collection after and flip a tip to the caddie and off to the locker room to shower and change.  Head to the bar to catch a game on TV and some talk BS after our round.

I can say the one aspect I don't enjoy is feeling like every point of service you have to give a tip to the person. This is the same at some hotels, and prefer to give tips collectively when possible. One for clubhouse staff, one for caddie, one for restaurant staff. Just a pet peeve of mine as I am a good tipper, but when one guy takes my clubs out of my car, then another puts them on a cart I don't want to have to give each guy 2-3 bucks or feel obligated.

So in summation for me there is more to enjoying a course than the actual architecture as illustrated, although shooting a career best round would help!

This is the best troll post I've seen on GCA. Well played sir...well played.

[Derek_Duncan]

Upon arrival is there a welcoming environment with bag drop, staff welcoming you and directing you for the next stage of your journey. Is there a clubhouse that has amenities that you can change your shoes and shower and relax after your round with a drink? Major priorities maybe not, but that really adds to the experience IMO.

Is there a nice restaurant/bar to have a quick breakfast/lunch before the round? Love doing this and then leisurely going to the driving range to warm up and then hit a few putts to get the feel for the greens. Are the balls pyramided and staff looking after the range? Big deal no, attention to detail yes!

If I'm getting a caddie it is nice to have the caddie with you on the range to get a feel for your game and talk to make the next 4 hour enjoyable together. I love getting a caddie and helps add to the experience tremendously, especially for courses I haven't played previously.

I really enjoy a welcoming starter, with water, tees, cards, pencils, ball marks, towels ect available at the first tee....

I generally downgrade a course for all this stuff. The more money a club/course spends on things not related to the golf, the more I try to avoid it.

I'm having a hard time thinking of courses that offer all of this that actually have a great golf and aren't extremely overpriced. Resorts are another matter since their purpose is to sleep and feed guests.

Bag drops are the worst thing to ever happen to golf.

There is no way I would downgrade a course for the bells and whistles, but I would rather not pay for that stuff.  Generally speaking, the leaner the off course operation the better for promoting a low key experience which is something I generally prefer.  The real classy places pull off the low key and lean ambience when you know damn well the membership and/or club is swimming in cash...at its core...this is really where English golf at the top level excells.

Ciao

Sean,


I'm being a little facetious about downgrading a rating on a course with an "operation," but I am wary of them. For my tastes this is where the golf course and club experience has gone off the rails. The customer is paying for all this non-essential crap and I'm sure it contributes greatly to why so many places struggle financially. This is where Mike Young should chime in.


Aside from that I just personally hate seeing a bag boy on the curb or having to listen to a starter talk to me like I've never been on a golf course before.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff Schley is the only one so far who has brought up all the factors that I think should NOT be used to evaluate a golf course.  Partly this is because I'm a no-frills, trunk-slamming guy at heart, but I really don't think the service is part of the golf course.  Having a beautiful, well-integrated clubhouse can give you a brownie point or two, but that's about all.


I tried when I was much younger to break this down 100 different ways in order to figure out what features were appealing to me, or popular with other golfers -- that's what enabled me to reject difficulty as a primary objective of design, even as I realized that having certain very challenging shots was important.  So there are "factors" that go into what everyone likes, without question, and certain factors that have a large consensus behind them.


However, I'm with Sean that whenever you try to write a formula, you start overlooking the things that make unique courses so special, and therefore missing the entire point of the exercise.

[Joel Pear]

You have to wonder where "reputation" fits into this process.  When I got my first invitation to play Lost Dunes, I know I was predisposed to liking it.  It was the firs Tom Doak course I played and both he and the course have their reputations.  For the record, I loved the course.  It challenged me, made me hit all of my clubs, provided me with options on how to play the hole, and had incredible greens.


I know people who judge a course the first time they play it, by how they played.  If they didn't play well, they didn't like the course.  When I play a course for the first time, I'm interested in how the land was used, did I use all of the clubs in my bag, were the green complexes interesting, etc.  However, I get extra excited when I get to play a highly ranked national course, and I'm pretty sure that colors my opinion.


As to judging if one course is better than another, it's mostly about the overall feel.  A couple of years ago, I had the opportunity to play a couple of very highly thought of courses in New York.  Both were great, but one was just special.  It's like Potter Stewart said about pornography.  I may not be able to describe it, but I know it when I see it.

[George Pazin]

My own personal metric is, how interesting are the shots?


The single least interesting question a golf course can ask, to me, is "What's my yardage?" To say I couldn't care less if it's asking me for a stock 7 iron on one hole and a stock 5 on another and a 3/4 wedge on the next is so far beyond an understatement that it devalues the meaning of the word.


If I think I'm having to consider which side of the fairway matters, or which side of the green I should favor, or whether a low running shot would be preferable to a high floating shot - those are the things that matter to me. And I think those sorts of questions should be asked if you are in the middle of the fairway or 20 yards right of the green.


If I'm focused more on my own game than the golf course, then I don't think the golf course is particularly compelling.


This is admittedly a pretty vague standard, which is probably why I'm one of the few on here who eschews rankings. Well, that plus I don't play nearly enough to have a good frame of reference...

[Kalen Braley]

I'm not sure if Jason did it on purpose, but understanding the nature of the conundrum of which course is better is ultimately found in his question:


How do YOU decide.......


When its left to this, cat fights will always ensue. Its like trying to answer which is best...blondes, redheads, or brunettes...