The irony here is that in my day job, we are consumed by rankings determined by math. “Hit” records and “Top Charting” films are determined by people voting with both digital pocketbooks, subjective categorization, and math so arcane and detailed, we hire folks from the NSA looking for “a career change”.
Our current business model is based on quantitative data analysis and manipulation.
“Ratings” drive network tv decisions except when “buzz” intercedes... or an executive with a family member in the production company. It is serious business. I have been shot at trying to recruit talent in NY and Tennessee.
(That said, I've been shot at playing golf at course where a neighbor didn't necessarily think that black guys should be playing golf adjacent to his property, so this Top 100 chatter is easy listening background noise to me.)
As a “golf chair” with a background in creative production, digital media, computer science, I repeat that find the Top 100 “Lists” useful. Additionally, this is exactly how the Billboard Top 100 became the juggernaut in the pre-digital music days. A way to track popularity. That “list” tracked creative product judged by mysterious formulae defined by a blend of retailers and radio manipulating math shrouded in graft and secrecy.
Flash to today, still fewer than 100 folks really know how a movie wins the Golden Globe for best costume, and hit songs are determined by charts built on algorithms likely built by folks that don’t like music.
In comparison, GCA lists are mostly analog collections. They built on an eclectic economy driven by a mix of committees, golf chairs, clubs, municipalities, mayors, billionaires, rich donors, Sunday afternoon TV and some GoFundMe pages. No two projects are the same. One project may have a golf Archie that consults and cares, others are built by a hit and run team that bombs and gouges the scampers like a traveling carnival.
List makers send teams to explore and proxy for the lay golfer at large and deliver a qualitative opinions to sell ads, gain eyeballs and in some cases membership on the list panel.
Judging ALL of it is subjective. This is not unlike judging Olympic Ice Skating and Best Picture. That’s part of the excitement. Yes the list or controversial and imperfect, but they are presently old-school and emotionally biased mad by humans.
They are flawed and could be better like everything else. You can enjoy it, argue over it, be disgusted, or just don’t watch. If you are in here, this is the place to fire up and enjoy the debate.