Golf Digest Top 100 Public Courses - 2019-2020

[Jay Mickle]

Chad,
Interesting that in your experience it's 50/50. I think they are both really fun and definitely a great place to call home but like you I have Mid Pines well above Pine Needles. I think Kyle and his team have done some excellent work down there. I've just never heard anyone say they thought Pine Needles was stronger. Though I'm now wondering what Jay Mickle told me 

I hear about what Chad hears much to my dismay. Mid Pines was designed to be a championship course in 1921, in 1928 Pine Needles was designed to provide for real estate sales for a number of wealthy investors  and as a resort course.  As a result PN was routed over a considerably larger parcel to accommodate the Realestate needs and that expansiveness seems to be what many are drawn to. It plays a bigger course and by virtue of its genes plays a bit easier to score on, and who doesn't like to score better. MP on the other hand is a more intimate yet strategically more demanding routing all the while maintaining the original internal contouring on the greens. Some have said that "if you have a 20' putt at PN you are trying to sink it, at MP you are trying not to 3 putt".
How well one scores is often a indicator of which course one prefers, not which course is best.

[Sean_A]

I have only played each renovated course once each, but I think Mid Pines is the better of the two...mainly because of the greens, but it is far from perfect.  Other than the dreadful water on a few holes, I am not overly enamoured with the often repeated waste area right, waste area left. I think I prefer Pine Needles, which is rare for me to go for the bigger footprint course, but I do like the diversity of tee shots and extra space.  Plus, I much prefer the PN bar...which is no small matter    Both are well worth playing and I think Mid Pines is actually a great course.  They each get a 1* in my book. 

Ciao

[Jeff Schley]

In the name of providing extra data where its perhaps overkill, but what the hell...

I did a quick analysis on the top 50 courses, excluding ones like Pebble, Pinehurst2, Bethpage, etc where its a mixed bag...

Of those that had 3 or more...

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank
Dye - 8 - 20.5
Doak - 5 - 26
CC - 4 - 18.25
Fazio - 4 - 24
Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8
Kidd - 3 - 23
Jack N - 35.3

So who is the best? 

[Steve Kline]

I have only played each renovated course once each, but I think Mid Pines is the better of the two...mainly because of the greens, but it is far from perfect.  Other than the dreadful water on a few holes, I am not overly enamoured with the often repeated waste area right, waste area left. I think I prefer Pine Needles, which is rare for me to go for the bigger footprint course, but I do like the diversity of tee shots and extra space.  Plus, I much prefer the PN bar...which is no small matter    Both are well worth playing and I think Mid Pines is actually a great course.  They each get a 1* in my book. 

Ciao

I have played both a number of times pre- and post-renovation. It's really a tough call for me which I like better. I'd be happy playing both every single day. I like the first 14 holes at Pine Needles better. But, the last four holes, when you are playing very noticeably through residential real estate, I feel like I'm playing a very different, very resorty, course than the first 14 holes. Number 17 is by far my least favorite hole at Pine Needles. The tee box is cramped. And, you almost have to rope hook it off the tee to be in the fairway. Mid Pines never has that change in feel for me.

[Sean_A]

I have only played each renovated course once each, but I think Mid Pines is the better of the two...mainly because of the greens, but it is far from perfect.  Other than the dreadful water on a few holes, I am not overly enamoured with the often repeated waste area right, waste area left. I think I prefer Pine Needles, which is rare for me to go for the bigger footprint course, but I do like the diversity of tee shots and extra space.  Plus, I much prefer the PN bar...which is no small matter    Both are well worth playing and I think Mid Pines is actually a great course.  They each get a 1* in my book. 

Ciao

I have played both a number of times pre- and post-renovation. It's really a tough call for me which I like better. I'd be happy playing both every single day. I like the first 14 holes at Pine Needles better. But, the last four holes, when you are playing very noticeably through residential real estate, I feel like I'm playing a very different, very resorty, course than the first 14 holes. Number 17 is by far my least favorite hole at Pine Needles. The tee box is cramped. And, you almost have to rope hook it off the tee to be in the fairway. Mid Pines never has that change in feel for me.

Yes, PN's 10th and 17th holes are the low points for me. I barely noticed houses on the site so that isn't an issue for me. That said, I am not anti-buildings on courses.


Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

In the name of providing extra data where its perhaps overkill, but what the hell...

I did a quick analysis on the top 50 courses, excluding ones like Pebble, Pinehurst2, Bethpage, etc where its a mixed bag...

Of those that had 3 or more...

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank
Dye - 8 - 20.5
Doak - 5 - 26
CC - 4 - 18.25
Fazio - 4 - 24
Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8
Kidd - 3 - 23
Jack N - 35.3

So who is the best? 

Intentionally left out that on purpose.  But if I was judging, seems like its gotta go to Pete Dye! 

[Jeff_Brauer]

I would subtract the number of courses from the average rank, and rank by low score.  It favors the architects with the best average rankings, and slightly favors architects who have done more courses in the top 50, which I think is fair.  My results:

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank

Dye - 8 - 20.5 - 12.5

Doak - 5 - 26 - 21

CC - 4 - 18.25 - 14.25

Fazio - 4 - 24 - 20

Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8 - 35.8

Kidd - 3 - 23 - 20

Jack N - (3?) 35.3 - 32.3

My rank would then be Dye, CC, Faz, Kidd, Doak, Nicklaus, RTJ2.


Feel free to disagree, just one way to look at it.  Of course, if we had the size of the marketing budgets, that might alter the outcome.

[Tom_Doak]

I would subtract the number of courses from the average rank, and rank by low score.  It favors the architects with the best average rankings, and slightly favors architects who have done more courses in the top 50, which I think is fair.  My results:

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank

Dye - 8 - 20.5 - 12.5

Doak - 5 - 26 - 21

CC - 4 - 18.25 - 14.25

Fazio - 4 - 24 - 20

Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8 - 35.8

Kidd - 3 - 23 - 20

Jack N - (3?) 35.3 - 32.3

My rank would then be Dye, CC, Faz, Kidd, Doak, Nicklaus, RTJ2.


Feel free to disagree, just one way to look at it.  Of course, if we had the size of the marketing budgets, that might alter the outcome.

If you are going to design a voting system you should really test it out with a couple of hypotheticals to see how it holds up.


For example, by your system (or Kalen’s), building Forest Dunes made me a worse architect, because you had to average in two “low” top-50 scores with my others.  That hardly seems like the best way to do it, even if I am biased in this particular case!

[Jim Nugent]

In the name of providing extra data where its perhaps overkill, but what the hell...

I did a quick analysis on the top 50 courses, excluding ones like Pebble, Pinehurst2, Bethpage, etc where its a mixed bag...

Of those that had 3 or more...

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank
Dye - 8 - 20.5
Doak - 5 - 26
CC - 4 - 18.25
Fazio - 4 - 24
Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8
Kidd - 3 - 23
Jack N - 35.3

So who is the best? 

Even if you come up with a way to rank them, all you're using is their US courses open to the public.  By that measure, Mackenzie might not make top ten. 

I think for any ranking system to have merit, it must take into account the architects' total body of work. 

[Jeff Schley]

In the name of providing extra data where its perhaps overkill, but what the hell...

I did a quick analysis on the top 50 courses, excluding ones like Pebble, Pinehurst2, Bethpage, etc where its a mixed bag...

Of those that had 3 or more...

Name - # Courses - Avg Rank
Dye - 8 - 20.5
Doak - 5 - 26
CC - 4 - 18.25
Fazio - 4 - 24
Jones Jr - 4 - 39.8
Kidd - 3 - 23
Jack N - 35.3

So who is the best? 

Even if you come up with a way to rank them, all you're using is their US courses open to the public.  By that measure, Mackenzie might not make top ten. 

I think for any ranking system to have merit, it must take into account the architects' total body of work.

I agree 100% Jim. I'm a Cubs fan and all I want to remember is the 2016 world series and think of them as champs. Although the previous 108 years they were shall we say, practicing for a century or so to build up.