Why is Hidden Creek a top 100 course

[Jean Dumas]

Can someone please tell me why this is a top 100 course in the USA according to Golf.  I saw a fight between hp@hc and Matt Warf about it and thought there has to be something political with the rating.  

[hp@hc]

what do they call this on GCA - I believe the term is "strawman"

Nice post Newbie

[Tim_Weiman]

Jean:

Your question is a perfect example of why I hope GCA will never get involved in the silly ratings business.

Who really cares whether some course is number #92 or #132?

Keep in mind that most people who check in here haven't seen any particular course. With that in mind, the key thing is to share your observations about the course: what you liked or disliked, what stands out (positive or negative), how far out of their way should visitors go, etc.

Focus on sharing knowledge and you'll do just fine. Use Ran's excellent course reviews for guidance on what really works.

On the contrary, getting into arguments about course ratings are more likely to be a distraction from our goal of quality golf architecture discussion.

[Mike Worth]

Well, to start in on Matt Ward (Warf - LOL) I'll say this.

we love our club and I'll leave it at that

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jean,

It might be because Hidden Creek is one of the most enjoyable, member friendly courses that one could play.

SS1,

That's not true, I have discussed the topic of ratings and the perception of the club by the golfing world, with members.

[GeoffreyC]

Jean

Hidden Creek is a reasonable candidate for the Golfweek Top 100 Modern List but by no means a sure thing to make it.  In my opinion there is no way that it should be considered among the top 100 courses in the country when you include all courses.

Pat Mucci summed up quite well the best attributes of Hidden Creek.  You can search the archives back a while for detailed descriptions of comments from several contributors to this DG. I don't have the patience to rehash them here. As it is I'll still probably be scolded for my personal opinion.

[Steve Lapper]

Geoff,

    I am officially "scolding" you for placing your personal opinions above those of the esteemed magazine raters. Don't you know better? Harumphhhhhh....Naughty Boy.


    I am biased in favor of Hidden Creek....oops there I go...

Bad slapper!!!!


 

[GeoffreyC]

Slapper

Are you then placing one group of raters in the "esteemed" category and others with different opinions then yours "less esteemed"?  

Your contrarian friend  

[Brian Phillips]

Jean,

I don't know and don't really care if the course is in the top 100 or not.  Is it important?  I have only walked the course and I loved it.

I prefer it to Aronimink which many on here think is a great course.  I think Hidden Creek has more variety than many courses and as Pat said it looked like a really fun course to play which I presume was the clients brief to C&C.

Hidden Creek is a fun members course, it doesn't matter if it is in the top 100 or not.

Brian

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Jean Dumas,
(Any relation to Alexander?)

I have not played Hidden Creek, but have heard from the most learned eyes that it is a unique course that requires study to realize the beauty of it's architectural content. Subtlety is a good thing, and I from my understanding that like many GREAT courses in this world its a course that has unique features that isn't so much of a test as much as it is just a lovely place to play and enjoy the game. From my understanding, Woking is similar in this regard, not that it and Hidden Creek are anything alike, but its in the translation of language that sometimes cannot be seen by the ordinary human eye that makes them of a similar cloth.

Another course that is similar in this regard is the Valley Club of Montecito--one of the most enjoyable tours if you will. To call the two I have mentioned anything less then world class and then try to put a number between 1-100 on it would be utterly ridiculous.

Please, tell us about yourself and what you saw when you played Hidden Creek.

Cheers

[TEPaul]

"Can someone please tell me why this is a top 100 course in the USA according to Golf?"

Sure, I can tell you very simply. Because Golf thinks there aren't 100 courses in the USA that are better than Hidden Creek!  

I don't know what-all Golf uses as criteria to make their selections but I assume there's all kinds of extraneous stuff that doesn't have all that much to do with the actual architecture of a golf course, so all I can say is every other club and course in Golf's Top 100 just better watch their asses in the rankings when Roger gets around to building the clubhouse at Hidden Creek!

[Scott_Burroughs]

Jean,

Perhaps the question should be about Briar's Creek, also in the GM Top 100.  Many GW raters played it, and it didn't even crack GW's Top 100 Modern.  More good has been said here about HC than has been said about BC.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

And thank you Redanman-san! Lets go eat some sushi!

[mike_malone]

 I think Scott is right.Hidden Creek is a wonderful course.But it might be a bit early to put it in a top 100.I can see it as highly rated.It seems to have become a whipping boy for those upset at the ratings not the course.I still believe the last 25 or so on these lists are arbitrary.There are probably better courses to be picking on .

     
    There is much subtlety to the course and not a lot of stunning features . This may account for the divergence of opinion.


  Brian P.
     Aronimink is considered overrated by many in Philly,so i can easily see one preferring Hidden Creek to it.

[GeoffreyC]

Mayday

Hidden Creek is NOT a whipping boy for anything.  It is simply that there is alway a VENOMOUS reply to anyone who happens to disagree with the Golf Magazine rating.

I can't think of anyone who has said negative things about the course but anything but the glorious acolades expected after the GM list came out are returned with nasty replies. No one that I can recall is "picking on it". Matt Ward included. I personally don't give a crap about hp@hc's credentials.  He is certainly entitled to his opinion as I am of mine. And without having to put up with that crap either.

HC did not come out in the "last 25", it was listed as #73 of all 25,000 or so courses in the country.

[mike_malone]

 Geoff
 I mean that it seems to be THE course people use as not belonging.Scott seems to imply there is at least one other course that might  be a better choice.You are correct that i have not seen negative talk about the course,just the ranking.What is the difference in ranking points between #73 and #75?Between #50 and #100.?
    One thing i noticed while there was a sense that the course was built with an eye to ranking.The proximity of green to tee,the crafting of the bunkers,for example.

 redanman
    I often see Aronimink as the #2 Philly course:i see 3 or 4 i would rate above it.

[Scott_Burroughs]

if you are talking 100 courses in the USA USAUSA, there is not much room for a modern one

So, you're saying that no matter the quality of a modern course, they don't belong because of when they were built?  Or that between 2 courses of comparable quality, the older one more deserves to be on the list?  Sounds like GD "tradition"-like fudge factor reasoning....  

With the types of courses that have been built in the past 10 years of high quality (BD, PD, FH, WS, SH), not to mention other modern courses such as The Golf Club, Sawgrass, Cuscowilla, AS, etc., I think that the "old guard" better watch out.  Who knows, the new Shore course at MPCC could be that special....

Or are you just saying HC isn't that (Top 100 U.S.) special?

[Scott_Burroughs]

Mayday,

"I often see Aronimink as the #2 Philly course".  are you talking strictly PA side?  Or are you including both PV and Merion in that statement?

[mike_malone]

 Scott
   Just in PA.I would only count the counties--Phila.,Del.,Chester,Bucks,Mont.Merion is usually#1.If you take up to Allentown and out to Reading it changes.
   

[redanman]

if you are talking 100 courses in the USA USAUSA, there is not much room for a modern one

So, you're saying that no matter the quality of a modern course, they don't belong because of when they were built?  Or that between 2 courses of comparable quality, the older one more deserves to be on the list?  Sounds like GD "tradition"-like fudge factor reasoning....  

Call it BIAS if you like, but in my opinion, there are no more than 20 courses built since 1960 that can match the quality of the older courses no matter how you slice it.  Hidden Creek can't make that 20.  I look at courses old and new a little bit differently as they are built for differnt reasons.  That's why I support the Golfweek rating system, it makes sense to make that separation.

p.s.  I love Hidden Creek peronally, but that does not cloud my reality testing.

[GeoffreyC]

Dr Redanman

Exactly my feeling as well. Including that last statement.

Well written!

[mike_malone]

redanman
    I can agree with your comments.I have to learn how to use smileys.

[mike_malone]

 
    that's what happens when i click on them

[Matt_Ward]

redanman:

Amen.

P.S. Before courses cross into the top 100 it might not be a bad idea for them to FIRST crack the top ten in states that are extremely competitive in design (i.e. NJ).

[S.I. Hayakawa]

Matt.

A question.  Does Golf Magazine have a Top 10 list for New Jersey?  I haven't seen one previous to your post.  I am hoping you can help me out here.

I also want to point out a minor issue regarding the use of "i.e." in your post.  I.e. is the abbreviation for the latin phrase "id est" (translation-is that) which is more plainly said, "that is to say".  More correctly you should have used e.g., (exempli gratia).  I know you're an editor and all and you would never make a mistake such as this on purpose.  Hope that helps you.