SCOREGolf Top 100 in Canada for 2018

[Ian Andrew]

I can pick at the courses, question the validity of one at the top or another at the bottom, but is the first time (if you include the "next 10") where they at least have everything they should on the list. It's more a question of whether things belong where they do.


I enjoyed the fact that one of the course (that I work with that did not make the Top 100 and usually does) was told over and over that they need to get rid of trees. Sometimes negative feedback to a club is helpful to the architect working there.  :  )


I do find it interesting that Quebec takes such strong criticism as having nothing. I' always liked the bones of Kanawaki and Beaconsfield and through a more historical approach on both courses would yield something special. My2C

[Ian Andrew]

By the way, architects are not allowed to be on the panel, but owners, professionals and superintendents are. I was curious to hear if others agreed with this idea or thought we should have a vote. I asked that we be allowed to vote, but had to make our results public to make or choices open to scrutiny.


When I checked two years back I had seen 85% of the courses. Back in 1994 I was only one of two who had seen Highlands Links!

[Tom_Doak]

By the way, architects are not allowed to be on the panel, but owners, professionals and superintendents are. I was curious to hear if others agreed with this idea or thought we should have a vote. I asked that we be allowed to vote, but had to make our results public to make or choices open to scrutiny.


When I checked two years back I had seen 85% of the courses. Back in 1994 I was only one of two who had seen Highlands Links!

I have always thought architects belonged on these panels, both because we get around to see more courses than the average golfer out of professional curiosity, and because we "see" more on a first visit than most golfers do.


There is, naturally, some conflict of interest and one should not be allowed to vote on one's own courses -- so, contrary to conventional wisdom, having a lot of architects on the panel tends to drag down the ratings for modern courses  .  But we're not going to be any more biased than owners, professionals or superintendents are about their home courses ... we just have more irons in the fire.

[Tim Martin]

I can't speak to the poll in question but to the best of my knowledge there are a number of architects on the Golf Magazine panel.

[John Kavanaugh]

Architects frown on magazine raters designing courses so what is good for the goose so to speak.

[Tim Martin]

I recall going to the Presidents Cup and seeing the Reesified(it's a word ) Royal Montreal Blue. Would have loved to have seen the original Dick Wilson course.

[Peter Pallotta]

I'd imagine that architects don't have as much problem with access, and thus aren't unduly impressed with exclusivity (a St George's or a National or a Beacon Hall); and that, being students of the game & of the craft who've already played many of the world's classic courses, are not too much enamoured by history *as* history or design pedigree *as* design pedigree (the Stanley Thompsons); and finally that, being architects, they're the ones best able to separate out the "architecture"/field of play from the scenery and surrounds (the Banff Springs, and the instant appeal of the Cabots)-- though I'm not so sure that this last statement is true, and in fact it may be the very opposite of 'true'. But if it *was* true, I'd say that all panels should be jam-packed with architects.   
Of course, aside from a few of them, I know all these courses only from write-ups and photos; and plus, I must be a 'tier two' type of fellow, because the courses I find most appealing are Westmount and Weston. 

[John Kavanaugh]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics.


Any good critic is incapable of creating anything on their own.

[Peter Pallotta]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics....
Any good critic is incapable of creating anything on their own.

Ah, but that's my point -- with any luck, architects would be *bad* critics, which is precisely the kind of critic I'd want when it comes to identifying the best 'fields of play'...the only criteria I'm interested in as an actual golfer who wants to play golf.

[Bob Jenkins]

 Regarding Sagebrush, I am aware of at least one very credible, potential buyer expressing interest and am following up regularly to see if there is any progress.


Officially, the mortgage holder who financed the Newmark purchase from the original owners, have a court ordered order for sale and it has been listed for sale with a realtor in the Merritt, B.C. area for $8.1 million.


I recall a thread on this site several years back discussing James Island, which is a small island off the coast of Vancouver Island, not far from Victoria. It has been owned by the McCaw family from Seattle for many years and I hear it either has been sold or is in the process of being sold. It is about as private as a course can get. I know of only one person who has played the course. Here is a link to an old article on the island.


https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/02/james-island-for-sale-craig-mccaw_n_5754368.html

My interest in Sagebrush is solely to see the course open up again. I was fortunate enough to be able to play there for several years and it was always a pleasure to host GCAers who invariably loved the place as I do.

[Bob Jenkins]

Regarding the Top 100, I have played very few courses in Ontario, having lived on the west coast all my life.


Courses out west which I believe should rate are Vancouver Golf Club, Marine Drive GC and the Ridge course at Northview. Jim Urbina and George Waters did some great work at Marine Drive a few years ago on the bunkers and green surrounds which made the course much more interesting. Northview is a Palmer / Seay course which is an excellent golf course, quite wide open and is well maintained. Vancouver Club has never been mentioned in any ratings I recall. It has a great back nine, closing with 5 par fours which are very difficult. The Ridge course at Predator Ridge is also excellent. Doug Carrick, who designed the Ridge course, is also working on changes to the Predator course, which is the original course up there.


Good to see Point Grey get some mention as well. Capilano and Shaughnessy remain the two most significant courses around here from an architectural point of view.

[Mark Fedeli]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics.

Film.

[John Kavanaugh]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics.

Film.

Do you watch the Academy Awards?

[Kalen Braley]

Anecdotally, when I watch cooking competition shows on the Food Network, almost without exception, the first ones to be shown the door in a show like "Chopped" are the ones who claim to be teachers or critics....


The actual working chefs, doing it day in and day out... frequently hand them thier ass.

[Mark Fedeli]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics.

Film.

Do you watch the Academy Awards?

Sometimes. I also studied film history and read wonderful works of serious criticism from Bogdanovich, Goldman, Schrader, Godard, Truffaut, Cocks, Assayas, Eisenstein, and many more including Scorsese, Herzog, Coppola, and Welles. Cahiers du Cinéma is one of the most prominent examples, but film has a long and varied history of writers and directors who either started in criticism or who worked very hard throughout their lives to educate others and write critically about the form.

[John Kavanaugh]

The same could be said about Doak. Which I would say puts him in good company.

[Mark Fedeli]

The same could be said about Doak. Which I would say puts him in good company.

Absolutely.


And I think there are some art forms where the actual doing of it won't necessarily make you a great critic, but serious writing and thinking about it will definitely make you better at doing it.

[Wayne_Kozun]

On thing that is BS in these ratings is that Kananaskis is on the list.  The courses at Kananaskis were destroyed by a flood in 2013.  One course was rebuilt but it seems as if it has substantially changed.  And the course was only open for a few weeks before the ratings period closes.

[Alan Carter]

On thing that is BS in these ratings is that Kananaskis is on the list.  The courses at Kananaskis were destroyed by a flood in 2013.  One course was rebuilt but it seems as if it has substantially changed.  And the course was only open for a few weeks before the ratings period closes.

Lorette opened for limited play last September and then was open again for just over a month this spring before the rating closed.  I wasn't one of the raters that played it, but I do know that they had a bunch of raters out to play, easily enough to fulfill the requirements for the Top 100.  From what I heard the course was in better condition that most of the courses in the province coming out of a brutal winter. 


I've only toured the work on both courses last fall.  Improvements to the old course designs is what I see. It should be much more playable and enjoyable for players of all levels.

[Wayne_Kozun]

I stand corrected - apparently it has been open to limited play since last fall and they have had enough raters to play it so that it makes the list.  They still credit the course to RTJ with later work by Gary Browning.

[Alan Carter]

I stand corrected - apparently it has been open to limited play since last fall and they have had enough raters to play it so that it makes the list.  They still credit the course to RTJ with later work by Gary Browning.

Wayne, they've been going full tilt on Lorette since mid-May, added the front nine of Kidd I think it was June 1st and then they just opened the back nine on Kidd yesterday.  Kananaskis is now once again 36 holes for the first time since 2013! 

[Tom_Doak]

Raters are critics. Please name an industry where people who are actively involved in the creative process make good critics.


Any good critic is incapable of creating anything on their own.

So I'm not a good critic?  Because I think I've made a pretty good case for the other half.

[Tom_Doak]

The same could be said about Doak. Which I would say puts him in good company.

Absolutely.


And I think there are some art forms where the actual doing of it won't necessarily make you a great critic, but serious writing and thinking about it will definitely make you better at doing it.

I don't think the ability to cross over from one to the other is guaranteed in either case. 


Being good at golf architecture [or construction] absolutely does not make you a good critic.  Many architects think their way of doing things is the only way.


Serious writing and thinking about golf architecture will give you a wider range of ideas, but you've still gotta be able to apply those ideas to a real piece of ground, and then execute them ... which is not the same thing as critiquing, at all.  [In fact, it's two other things you've got to be good at.]   

[Wayne_Kozun]

Some excellent thoughts from Jeff Mingay(on conditioning) and Ian Andrew(on challenge) in this article:


http://scoregolf.com/feature/how-we-rate-them/