New Golf Magazine Top 100

[Ira Fishman]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

[Daryl David]

As there is no universe where Gamble Sands is better than Streamsong Blue or Sand Valley.

[Stewart Abramson]

PS, re some comments about True Blue.  I am not familiar with the course at all, but the name itself possibly sabotages its rating.  No idea about the name origin, but just as I view "Pete Dye Golf Club" or "Robert Trent Jones Golf Club" as horrible names for a golf club, I'd put TB in same category.  Maybe even worse.

Not sure what's troublesome about the name True Blue or why the name should affect ones view of the course.  I believe the site was an indigo plantation in a prior life. The plantation may have been called True Blue, or the name may just be an homage to the blueish color.of the indigo. Certainly a better name than True Indigo 

[Kevin_Reilly]

Just offering a (weak) reason the course may be underestimated.  "True Blue" to me is an unusual club name, but that's just me!

[Dan Gallaway]

As there is no universe where Gamble Sands is better than Streamsong Blue or Sand Valley.

View of ocean/large lake/river elevates for some.  Which makes me think that Pinehurst #2 must be really good

[Joe Zucker]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

That's interesting.  I disagree with this and I'm someone who thinks Mid Pines is the second best course in Pinehurst (I have not played #10)

[Tom_Doak]

PS, re some comments about True Blue.  I am not familiar with the course at all, but the name itself possibly sabotages its rating.  No idea about the name origin, but just as I view "Pete Dye Golf Club" or "Robert Trent Jones Golf Club" as horrible names for a golf club, I'd put TB in same category.  Maybe even worse.

I was pretty lost in the weeds as to how the discussion had turned to Trie Blue [which I’ve never seen] - looking back it appears that you’ve confused it with Blue Mound, which WAS discussed.


Such is the level of discourse about golf course rankings!

[mike_malone]

Is there a second 100?

[Kevin_Reilly]

PS, re some comments about True Blue.  I am not familiar with the course at all, but the name itself possibly sabotages its rating.  No idea about the name origin, but just as I view "Pete Dye Golf Club" or "Robert Trent Jones Golf Club" as horrible names for a golf club, I'd put TB in same category.  Maybe even worse.

I was pretty lost in the weeds as to how the discussion had turned to Trie Blue [which I’ve never seen] - looking back it appears that you’ve confused it with Blue Mound, which WAS discussed.


Such is the level of discourse about golf course rankings!

Ha, guilty...but my original misdirected comment applies to Blue Mound in Wisc as well!

[Pierre_C]

I was out at Cal Club a few weeks ago. The club started a caddy program this year per the golf rating. That is what I was told from a friend who is a member. Wonder if that accounts for 1 step up?


Ridgewood's drop of 11 is a surprise. The club spent a lot of money revamping the practice area and built a new golf center.

[Thomas Dai]

Well done to those who’s new courses have appeared in the listing for the first time, quite an achievement I’d say, and to those who’s restorations/renovations have resulted in a courses reappearance on the listing.
Atb

[John Handley]

@Pierre


I have been a member at the Cal Club and the caddy program was started when we renovated the golf course back in '08.  Zoo it has been around for a long time and I highly doubt, that played any role in Cal Club moving up one spot.


It is usually getting the raters to visit and play the club.  The golf course at Cal has not changed in the past few years.  It is a brilliant golf course, in great condition and fun to play. 

[Pierre_C]

@Pierre

I have been a member at the Cal Club and the caddy program was started when we renovated the golf course back in '08.  Zoo it has been around for a long time and I highly doubt, that played any role in Cal Club moving up one spot.

It is usually getting the raters to visit and play the club.  The golf course at Cal has not changed in the past few years.  It is a brilliant golf course, in great condition and fun to play.

@John,

  Thank you for the clarification. Hmm...I must have misunderstood the member, Steve.  We always carry our bags when playing Cal Club, but on my last trip he asked if I wanted a caddy.  Steve always carry his bag, so I must have assumed the caddy program is new. I was at Cal Club for a few days in mid Oct. (after the heat wave) and noticed several groups with caddies, something I had not noticed on prior trips. More than likely given my age, my memory isn't very good.

[Mike Hendren]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

If Donald J. Ross posted regularly on this site would Pinehurst 10 so easily have kicked Mid Pines and Pine Needles to the curb in just a few months?


That said, I’d I ever make it to Pinehurst Resort I’ll give 1, 2 and 10 a go.

[PCCraig]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

If Donald J. Ross posted regularly on this site would Pinehurst 10 so easily have kicked Mid Pines and Pine Needles to the curb in just a few months?


That said, I’d I ever make it to Pinehurst Resort I’ll give 1, 2 and 10 a go.

1 needs to be restored/renovated.


3 is wonderful.


4 was Top 100 a couple of years ago but the reality is that course isn't anywhere near Top 100 material. Fine course but not the best piece of land there at the resort and they were stuck with Fazio's left over pond to work around.

[Ian Cox]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

If Donald J. Ross posted regularly on this site would Pinehurst 10 so easily have kicked Mid Pines and Pine Needles to the curb in just a few months?


That said, I’d I ever make it to Pinehurst Resort I’ll give 1, 2 and 10 a go.

Ross’s number 2 is where it is on the rankings, as such it’s earned that position… Ten is good, it’s very good… if playing ten rounds I don’t think that I would play more rounds on number two.

[Kalen Braley]

Perhaps the movement in relative position of a course, (which hasn't changed anything), is a reflection of the difference in raters on the panel...not the course itself.


We want opinions to be independent from the group but then when a course moves the fur flies

[Joe Zucker]

Perhaps the movement in relative position of a course, (which hasn't changed anything), is a reflection of the difference in raters on the panel...not the course itself.


We want opinions to be independent from the group but then when a course moves the fur flies

I think this is true.  Ran's name is at the top of the list and we are all on Ran's website.  Most of us view golf similarly to Ran, ergo we think this is a good list.

[Roman Schwarz]

What has improved at Pebble (or negative changes in the courses above it) to justify a 2-position rise?  Did the slightly lower bunker profile on Sand Hills #7 cause it to drop one spot?  In what universe was Sheep Ranch ever one of the top 100 courses in the US?  The Valley Club is now 58 instead of 49...what happened there (probably nothing)? 

I don't see a problem with a course rising or falling with nothing actually changing at the course or the course it swaps with.


It's been 5 years since I played Pebble Beach, but I'd say it's gone down a few points in my mind this year.  I've long valued great holes more than I've penalized for indifferent stretches.  However, I'm pretty familiar with #2, attended the Open this summer, and saw it pretty much back to normal by mid summer (assuming we're not including the driving range).  My visit to Pebble was in October after the Open and you could still see the mowing lines where they had to narrow the fairways.  In order to host the best, they had to totally change the course and it still wasn't 100% back months later.  #2 was basically the same course summer of '23 and summer of '24 other than some withheld water in May and June.  If ranking courses was more than just a daydream exercise for me, I might go through and reconsider other courses and how elastic they are for hosting elite players (not necessarily PGA/majors) vs day to day operation.  None of those courses changed, but my perception may have.


Another example would be Banff and Jasper.  I played them in 2014 and initially favored Banff slightly (see: better best holes theory above).  For many years, I kept swapping them back and forth, reading every piece of literature I could find on them, doing hole-by-hole match plays, etc.  Then in 2017 I went to Bandon for the first time, fell in love with Trails, and solidified Jasper ahead of Banff.  At that point, I started to value the full collection of holes and the pace of the holes a little more.


Courses may not change, the list of people rating them may not either, but the people themselves can change, and I think that's ok.  If I see something that stretches my mind, it usually takes some time to let it sink in and figure out how I really feel without recency bias at play.  Throw a rock in the water and it takes awhile for the ripples to play out.

[Tom_Doak]

If Donald J. Ross posted regularly on this site would Pinehurst 10 so easily have kicked Mid Pines and Pine Needles to the curb in just a few months?

Mike:


I guess that's a fair question, but some perspective:


1.  Mid Pines and Pine Needles have never been ranked very high by any of the major publications . . . they suffer from the long shadow of Pinehurst #2 and from the surplus of great Donald Ross designs


2.  Mid Pines only came up in prominence the past few years after a major renovation and a lot of publicity and attention being drawn to it.  That's a big part of the fuel for the rise of Pinehurst #10 as well . . . and for every other new course and new restoration, for that matter


3.  Recency bias plays a role . . . everyone who voted on #10 just went there and remembers it well, which gives it a slight boost vs. the courses a panelist hasn't seen for 5-10 years [or more!]


4.  I have tried not to put my thumb on the scale for any particular one of my new courses.  They all have something to say for themselves, and they can't all be ranked, any more than Mr. Ross gets too many of his courses into the rankings


5.  Pinehurst and Bandon and Cabot are VIP advertisers in all of the golf publications . . . there is no direct correlation there but don't think that the editors never think about it

[Mark Pritchett]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

Only the one we live in. 

[John Blain]

There is no universe in which Bandon Dunes is a better course than Mid Pines.

If Donald J. Ross posted regularly on this site would Pinehurst 10 so easily have kicked Mid Pines and Pine Needles to the curb in just a few months?


That said, I’d I ever make it to Pinehurst Resort I’ll give 1, 2 and 10 a go.

1 needs to be restored/renovated.


3 is wonderful.


4 was Top 100 a couple of years ago but the reality is that course isn't anywhere near Top 100 material. Fine course but not the best piece of land there at the resort and they were stuck with Fazio's left over pond to work around.

#3 is a bit of a different course since they built the Cradle, and not in a good way.

[Kevin Pallier]

Given they swapped positions - I'd be keen to hear if others feel Pebble should be higher than Fishers Island inside the Top10?


Personally, I rate them the other way round.

[Mark_Fine]

Wouldn’t it be great if the Top 100 lists were just that, a Top 100 list in say alphabetical order!  Problem then would be we would have much less to argue about.  Plus we all need to know which course is #31 vs which course is #32 (like anyone really knows that for sure)  

By way does anyone know how many of the same courses GD has on their Top 100 list that GM has on theirs?  Probably should look at GD’s Top 200 for comparison as the difference between #100 and #101 on their lists is almost negligible.

Getting hung up on one course being #63 and another being #78 is silly.  They are both in the Top 100.  They are both winners at least as far as that particular list is concerned. 

Golf course rankings are based on ordinal data. If you want to learn more about these rankings look up the term. Kind of like ranking wines.  Good luck with that

[Sean_A]

Negligible? In reality there is no difference. Fake math is used to create an illusion of truth or fact to disguise what is a completely subjective exercise. Even using 100 as the cutoff is subjective.

Ciao