SCOREGolf Top 100 in Canada for 2018

[Wayne_Kozun]

SCOREGolf magazines just released their latest rankings of golf courses in Canada.  Not surprising that Cabot Cliffs retains the top spot.  Highlands remains in the top 10 despite many complaints about conditioning.  Here is the top 10:



1   Cabot Cliffs PUB
2   Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge PUB
3   The National GC of Canada
4   Cabot Links PUB
5   St. George’s
6   Fairmont Banff Springs PUB
7   Hamilton G&CC – WEST, SOUTH
8   Cape Breton Highlands Links PUB
9   Capilano
10   Beacon Hall

[Tom_Doak]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

[Doug Hodgson]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

This is a GTA-centric publication.  The National is in Toronto....note no Quebec courses in top 34

[Ronald Montesano]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

Ignant fowlks


It has all of what used to be considered desirable by major magazines.

[Mark Saltzman]

As much as I enjoyed Cabot Cliffs, it's not the course I'd most like to play again.  St. George's, Jasper and Highlands Links are my numbers 1, 2 and 3.  Banff Springs and the Cabots are probably 4-6.


As far as National... it's never been a favourite of mine but, as Ron said, it ticks the rating criteria boxes fairly well. 


I've played 81/100 on the list.  Desperately need to make a trip out to BC!

[Tom_Doak]

 it ticks the rating criteria boxes fairly well. 

Are there criteria for this list?  What are they?

[Wayne_Kozun]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

This is a GTA-centric publication.  The National is in Toronto....note no Quebec courses in top 34

I disagree about the Toronto bias - I think that Ontario has many great courses - many of them are underrated.  I would say that Quebec has not had many great courses historically and very few high quality courses constructed in recent years - perhaps Laval is the one exception.  I have played Mt Bruno and it is excellent and perhaps deservers to be higher.  But I would place it similar to many Ontario courses of the same era like Weston, Scarboro, Summit, St. Thomas, etc.  I haven't played Royal Montreal but it doesn't seem to get raves.  I have played some of the courses at Mt Tremblant and wasn't overly impressed.  What Quebec courses are there that you think that deserve to be higher?

[Wayne_Kozun]

 it ticks the rating criteria boxes fairly well. 

Are there criteria for this list?  What are they?

This may have changed slightly for 2018 but I think this is pretty much the criteria.


Panellists rate courses by beauty, strategy, challenge, design, par 3s, par 4s, par 5s, conditioning and fun. Beauty, strategy, challenge and design each carried a weighting of 15 per cent; conditioning, par 3s, 4s and 5s each a weighting of five per cent; and fun gets the heaviest weighting at 20 per cent. Panellists award marks for each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal out of 10, which, based on the respective category weights, yields an over-all mark for the course out of 10. A course is then assigned a mean average, with a formula added in to reflect the number of panellists who rated it. A course must be rated by 10 panellists to be eligible for the Top 100 ranking.

[Dan Gallaway]

Found a somewhat recent article indicating that Sagebrush hopes to have a grand re-opening in 2019.  Might have heard that song before though?  I still hear tales of the King’s putter held there years ago

[Mark Saltzman]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

This is a GTA-centric publication.  The National is in Toronto....note no Quebec courses in top 34

I disagree about the Toronto bias - I think that Ontario has many great courses - many of them are underrated.  I would say that Quebec has not had many great courses historically and very few high quality courses constructed in recent years - perhaps Laval is the one exception.  I have played Mt Bruno and it is excellent and perhaps deservers to be higher.  But I would place it similar to many Ontario courses of the same era like Weston, Scarboro, Summit, St. Thomas, etc.  I haven't played Royal Montreal but it doesn't seem to get raves.  I have played some of the courses at Mt Tremblant and wasn't overly impressed.  What Quebec courses are there that you think that deserve to be higher?

I think Mt Bruno and Laval are the equal of Scarboro and Weston.

[Doug Hodgson]

I have no idea why everyone up there thinks The National GC of Canada is a special course.

This is a GTA-centric publication.  The National is in Toronto....note no Quebec courses in top 34

I disagree about the Toronto bias - I think that Ontario has many great courses - many of them are underrated.  I would say that Quebec has not had many great courses historically and very few high quality courses constructed in recent years - perhaps Laval is the one exception.  I have played Mt Bruno and it is excellent and perhaps deservers to be higher.  But I would place it similar to many Ontario courses of the same era like Weston, Scarboro, Summit, St. Thomas, etc.  I haven't played Royal Montreal but it doesn't seem to get raves.  I have played some of the courses at Mt Tremblant and wasn't overly impressed.  What Quebec courses are there that you think that deserve to be higher?

Well I am a member at Royal Mtl and so am perhaps not totally unbiased (although I have also lived in every province from Ontario to Alberta and belonged to clubs in all of them) but I definitely think it is now underrated in these polls. (I've played 17 of the courses rated above it on the current list). 


But aside from that I wonder if "name" architects and spectacular scenery receive a  bit too much weight in these polls.  Even if I just look at the Quebec courses included on this list it seems that Beaconsfield and all the Tremblant courses are too high relative to a number of other relatively old clubs that have courses designed by people like Howard Watson (Pinegrove, which was highly lauded by Arnold Palmer when it hosted 2 Cdn Opens in the 70s, and Hillsdale, for example).  Are raters from outside Quebec skipping the Watson courses in favour of courses by "big names" like Park and Thompson whose best work is in other places? 


A few courses I have played outside Quebec that seem ranked too high compared to the excluded or lower ranked QC courses would include Scarboro, Essex, Shaughnessy (but I last played here in 1984), Stewart Creek, Calgary.  Incidentally, all of these have either a big name historical architect or great scenery....

[Matt Kardash]

I live in Montreal. I admit, there isn't a whole lot worth seeing in Quebec.Is the National highly ranked because it has an important sounding name and was designed by an important architect?

[Doug Hodgson]

I've never played at The National so I can't speak directly to whether or not I think it deserves its high ranking....But it may not be irrelevant to its reputation that George Knudsen was a member here for many years and was quite public in frequently expressing his fondness for the course

[Brad Tufts]

Nice list, although strangely ordered on the website...by ten, with two columns for each specific ten...tough to follow.


Get thee to Cape Breton!


I can't comment on too many having only played like 6 of them, but it sucks that Sagebrush is out of commission, and Crowbush at 39 seems high.  Crowbush is a neat resort with an awesome beach, but I liked Green Gables more as a golf course. 


Fox Harb'r in the "Next 10" seems off too.  It's not the most interesting course ever, maybe bottom 50, but it's a gorgeous place to play golf with a handful of holes on the Northumberland Strait.


No New Brunswick reps either! (not that there should be)

[Wayne_Kozun]

I agree regarding Crowbush but it used to be much higher - I do believe it was once in the top 10 or at least top 15.


Regarding New Brunswick - Rod Whitman is renovating Algonquin which was a Ross course that was redone by Tom McBroom about 20 years ago.  I think that work is almost done, and they have been doing some PR trying to get some publicity and move up in the rankings.

[Wayne_Kozun]

I live in Montreal. I admit, there isn't a whole lot worth seeing in Quebec.Is the National highly ranked because it has an important sounding name and was designed by an important architect?

It is well conditioned and is extremely tough.  Pros and low handicappers tend to really like it but it isn't much fun when you are being punched in the nose on pretty much every hole.  Personally I would score it a bit lower on beauty, as there are lots of homes adjacent to the course, and it isn't much fun.

[Tom_Doak]

Panellists rate courses by beauty, strategy, challenge, design, par 3s, par 4s, par 5s, conditioning and fun. Beauty, strategy, challenge and design each carried a weighting of 15 per cent; conditioning, par 3s, 4s and 5s each a weighting of five per cent; and fun gets the heaviest weighting at 20 per cent. Panellists award marks for each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal out of 10, which, based on the respective category weights, yields an over-all mark for the course out of 10. A course is then assigned a mean average, with a formula added in to reflect the number of panellists who rated it. A course must be rated by 10 panellists to be eligible for the Top 100 ranking.

Thanks Wayne.  That's a lot of ratings!


Do panelists really mark each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal?  I rate the fun at Jasper at 9.23 ??

[Kalen Braley]

Found a somewhat recent article indicating that Sagebrush hopes to have a grand re-opening in 2019.  Might have heard that song before though?  I still hear tales of the King’s putter held there years ago

Dan,


It was a super fun KP and hanging in the Yurt post-golf with chat, drinks, friends, and laughs was worth the trip alone.


I haven't played any of the others on this list, but can't imagine SageBrush wouldn't be among them, just a terrific course!

[Wayne_Kozun]

Do panelists really mark each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal?  I rate the fun at Jasper at 9.23 ??

Yeah - that is a bit ridiculous.  At least you use integers on your 10 point scale and you use the full range from 0-10.


I wonder how the distribution of par among holes can affect the ratings, if at all?  Cabot Cliffs has six of each par 3,4 and 5, while many courses have only two par 5s, including Cabot Links.  Of the par 5s at Cliffs I think 7, 8, 15 and 18 are truly special whereas 1 and 10 are less great.  At Links I think #11 is an awesome par 5 but #1 is less special.  So I would rate the par 5s at Cliffs way higher.

[Brad Tufts]

Yeah I'd have to think Sagebrush would be in the top half, I think it was there when it was open.


I have heard about Algonquin a few times through the great podcasts that we have to listen to these days... played it once in the early 2000s and it was decent, just not that memorable other than the ocean holes.  I'm curious how the work turns out.  It seems as though they are tackling it in phases, and I think the work that is almost complete is only phase 1 or 2 of a potential 4/5 phases.  I don't think they are sure if they will be able to do them all, but I have no doubt it will be awesome if they get to complete the vision!

[Matt Kardash]

Do panelists really mark each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal?  I rate the fun at Jasper at 9.23 ??

Yeah - that is a bit ridiculous.  At least you use integers on your 10 point scale and you use the full range from 0-10.


I wonder how the distribution of par among holes can affect the ratings, if at all?  Cabot Cliffs has six of each par 3,4 and 5, while many courses have only two par 5s, including Cabot Links.  Of the par 5s at Cliffs I think 7, 8, 15 and 18 are truly special whereas 1 and 10 are less great.  At Links I think #11 is an awesome par 5 but #1 is less special.  So I would rate the par 5s at Cliffs way higher.

I am fairly certain there are 3 par 5's at Cabot Links. I am too lazy to check, but off the top of my head I can think of 3!

[Peter Pallotta]

On second thought...

Peter

[Doug Hodgson]

The more I think of this the more inescapable that the Thompson Top 5 are still Canada's Top 5.  I would order them Banff, St G, Jasper, Capilano, Highlands, with the top 3 very close together then a bit of a gap.  These courses are just so much fun to play.  I wish I could play them all the time! They are beautiful and interesting and represent golf at its very best.  No wonder MacKenzie basically said Thompson was best in the world after seeing Jasper.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Do panelists really mark each category to the nearest hundredth of a decimal?  I rate the fun at Jasper at 9.23 ??

Yeah - that is a bit ridiculous.  At least you use integers on your 10 point scale and you use the full range from 0-10.


I wonder how the distribution of par among holes can affect the ratings, if at all?  Cabot Cliffs has six of each par 3,4 and 5, while many courses have only two par 5s, including Cabot Links.  Of the par 5s at Cliffs I think 7, 8, 15 and 18 are truly special whereas 1 and 10 are less great.  At Links I think #11 is an awesome par 5 but #1 is less special.  So I would rate the par 5s at Cliffs way higher.

I am fairly certain there are 3 par 5's at Cabot Links. I am too lazy to check, but off the top of my head I can think of 3!

You're right - I forgot about the 8th hole.

[Mark_Fine]

I thought the same thing as Tom; I don’t get the high ranking for The National??  The course is hard but hard doesn’t mean great?   I think Toronto GC for example is a much more interesting design!