Course ratings.

[Slab]

Will depend purely on what course it is , what sort of courses you enjoy and what you look for in a course that makes you want to go back again

In all seriousness; surely a top 100 course in xyz list is a top 100 course in xyz list. Whether i think its top 100 or not doesn't really come into it

I'm asking what criteria a course must meet as a minimum to be considered for inclusion in a top 100 course list?

 

[IanM]

^^^^^ If we reverse the scenario and put the course alone away from St Andrews, it would struggle.
Now if location is not rated, and it is the course alone. Why is St Andrews rated so highly.

Ok, put it just outside Weston Super Mare..... but it is still over 500 years old and has the same history..... Would still be an icon. The course stands the test of time, it can't be all bad!

 

[Jimaroid]

I'm asking what criteria a course must meet as a minimum to be considered for inclusion in a top 100 course list?

It needs to be one better than the 101st course in the list.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Do you mean this link:-

https://www.golf-monthly.co.uk/courses/top-100-courses/top-100-criteria-60844

Or maybe the youtube video

Or an example one such write up :-

View attachment 28180

Hope that helps.

Perfect. Clearly laid out criteria and marked based on individual experience

 

[Jimaroid]

In all seriousness, all such lists are subjective and should be treated as such. People love lists, a well organised list has been the staple of discussion and discourse in society as long as we've had written history. The simple act of counting and numeracy stems from our love affair with ordering things. There's no escaping lists and they are rarely wholly objective. Even in cases where people are ranking things like the height of mountains, which are finitely measurable, there are hundreds of years worth of argument, discussion, various interpretations and yet there are still some outlying lunatic opinions that Everest isn't the highest of them all.

You can't prove or disprove rankings of golf courses as correct or wrong. The best thing anyone can do is to find people that share similar value judgements and go along with them. Statistically all the lists will average out roughly along the same lines but of course there will be some outlying anomalies.

Speaking of anomolies. Some in "new media" are very shrewd to this human fascination with lists and will use/abuse it for nefarious advertising purposes. List trolling is a fairly recent invention and sadly it works very well because people have a level of trust in ordered things that is easily exploited. For clarity, I'm not saying this exists in GM's Top 100, but it's very prevalent in the media within my professional industry.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

It's called opinion, coupled with budget and favours.

🤭

What are these 'budget and favours' you refer too?

 

[IanM]

Inference that if I as a course owner "bung you sufficient readies and scantily clad ladies/gentlemen/GNB (delete as per your preference!)" you will put Midlands Mudbath Golf and Country Club Championship Course sufficiently high up the rankings!!

Chance of that? Between "unlikely and none"

 

[Tashyboy]

What are these 'budget and favours' you refer too?

Could be my budget and missis T owes me a favour 😉

 

[Backache]

Some places you just pull into the car park, look out and just say “wow!”

Absolutely car park impression is one of the really vital things which is I believe one of the reasons Hunstanton to pick a random course is not a top 10 course but only a top 100 course , it's carpark lets it down.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Absolutely car park impression is one of the really vital things which is I believe one of the reasons Hunstanton to pick a random course is not a top 10 course but only a top 100 course , it's carpark lets it down.

IF (and that is a big if) a reviewer was to consider the car park when writing his review then it would come under 'Facilities' and they account for only 10% of the total mark. I cannot see any reviewer marking a poor car park down by more than 1 mark (if at all) so a drop in rating points of 1% isn't going to make a difference between top 10 and top 100.

 

[Tashyboy]

IF (and that is a big if) a reviewer was to consider the car park when writing his review then it would come under 'Facilities' and they account for only 10% of the total mark. I cannot see any reviewer marking a poor car park down by more than 1 mark (if at all) so a drop in rating points of 1% isn't going to make a difference between top 10 and top 100.

Cannot believe that when St Andrews was designed, car parks was a secondary thought 😁

 

[IanM]

Absolutely car park impression is one of the really vital things which is I believe one of the reasons Hunstanton to pick a random course is not a top 10 course but only a top 100 course , it's carpark lets it down.

I suppose I left myself wide open to that one!!

So, Burnham gets its high rating as for the excellent tarmac as you cannot see the course from the Car Park..... Turnberry is out due to the wee pothole as you drive in!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

In all seriousness; surely a top 100 course in xyz list is a top 100 course in xyz list. Whether i think its top 100 or not doesn't really come into it

I'm asking what criteria a course must meet as a minimum to be considered for inclusion in a top 100 course list?

Ok I’ll try

1. The visual look of the course including its surroundings

2. The shape of the holes

3. The bunkering

4. The condition of the course

5. Does the course have that “Wow” as you play it , does it make you smile as you walk around

6. The set up , how the course flows

7. The greens

8. The clubhouse and it’s feel

For example when you drive into Sunningdale you feel you are at a special golf place , the big tree dwarves about the club house which is spectacular, you look down the first and just smile , the course just flows lovely , it’s condition is excellent, the greens perfect , bunkering just at the right areas and the right amount. It’s a course that excites people , makes them want to go back as soon as possible , it’s one that people will always talk about.

 

[Jacko_G]

I played another top 100 course today that makes a mockery of the rankings and "criteria". To even suggest this track is better than the likes of Western Gailes or even Dundonald is laughable if we're talking design, holes etc etc.

You can have subjectivity all day long but some courses and their rankings are laughable.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I played another top 100 course today that makes a mockery of the rankings and "criteria". To even suggest this track is better than the likes of Western Gailes or even Dundonald is laughable if we're talking design, holes etc etc.

You can have subjectivity all day long but some courses and their rankings are laughable.

Which course was it ?

There are a number of courses that I think should be higher or lower but haven’t as yet played any that are wilder inaccurate

 

[IanM]

That's the thing.... the higher or lower is open to debate, and those no quite making the cut, always good for debate.... that's half the reason for the rankings!!!

But any real stinkers in the last 100? Really?? Be interested in any suggestions for that!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

That's the thing.... the higher or lower is open to debate, and those no quite making the cut, always good for debate.... that's half the reason for the rankings!!!

But any real stinkers in the last 100? Really?? Be interested in any suggestions for that!

The only stinker I would say for me is the Brabazon - condition wise excellent but for me it’s a boring parkland course

I believe Burnham and Berrow is a great course but no way imo is it that much better than RCP and it’s certainly not better than Swinley and Hankley Common

 

[richart]

The only stinker I would say for me is the Brabazon - condition wise excellent but for me it’s a boring parkland course

I believe Burnham and Berrow is a great course but no way imo is it that much better than RCP and it’s certainly not better than Swinley and Hankley Common

I have played around 50 of the top 100, and I think only one of those courses shouldn’t be in the top 100. The rest are fully deserving of being in the top 100, but like everyone else, I would put some higher, and some lower. In my opinion for example Saunton East should be higher than Burnham and Berrow, and West Hill higher than Woking.

Having a top 100 list, means some good debates on the forum, but I do get the impression that some think their opinion is fact.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I have played around 50 of the top 100, and I think only one of those courses shouldn’t be in the top 100. The rest are fully deserving of being in the top 100, but like everyone else, I would put some higher, and some lower. In my opinion for example Saunton East should be higher than Burnham and Berrow, and West Hill higher than Woking.

Having a top 100 list, means some good debates on the forum, but I do get the impression that some think their opinion is fact.

Agree on both your examples and also spot on in regards the debate - at the end of the day we all have differing eyes and see a golf course different and at the end of the day it’s just an opinion.

Golf clubs though certainly seem to value the ratings

Bet I can guess which course you think shouldn’t be in it 😉

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I have played around 50 of the top 100, and I think only one of those courses shouldn’t be in the top 100. The rest are fully deserving of being in the top 100, but like everyone else, I would put some higher, and some lower. In my opinion for example Saunton East should be higher than Burnham and Berrow, and West Hill higher than Woking.

Having a top 100 list, means some good debates on the forum, but I do get the impression that some think their opinion is fact.

Good points well made and not idea how Brabazon gets in