GM Top 100 courses

[pokerjoke]

I do believe the weight of the assessment should be more towards the quality and lay out of the course which you appear to have got right 80% - and with that weighting I still don't understand how the Belfry Brabazon is in there as well as the Grove

Would put a course like Blackmoor above , Gog Magog , Sheringham , Cromer etc

Maybe I think it could be down to some of the members there that keeps it lower.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Hi Jake, I presume that all the "markers" give their marks out of ...... and it's all on a spreadsheet.

For a bit of forum fun and debate, could you either do a new list, or even tell us what some of the big difference in positions would be, if they were only rated on the following:-

Quality of test & design (35/100)
Mix of holes, character, does it reward good golf etc

Condition & presentation (30/100)
Tees, greens, different cuts of rough, signage, bunker quality etc

Visual appeal (15/100)
Memorable views, surrounding land, in keeping with its environment etc

I think most of us on here generally just judge on the above (apart from the Old course and some of the more memorable ones like Sunningdale etc). Not everyone stays for "high tea" and goes to the short game area, so personally would be fascinated what come out of the above......


Go on,I dares yer.....

I would second that, even go further and drop the visual appeal.
There are some great courses in some not so great places. Caister and Dundonald spring to mind.

 

[Jake O'Reilly]

Hi Jake, I presume that all the "markers" give their marks out of ...... and it's all on a spreadsheet.

For a bit of forum fun and debate, could you either do a new list, or even tell us what some of the big difference in positions would be, if they were only rated on the following:-

Quality of test & design (35/100)
Mix of holes, character, does it reward good golf etc

Condition & presentation (30/100)
Tees, greens, different cuts of rough, signage, bunker quality etc

Visual appeal (15/100)
Memorable views, surrounding land, in keeping with its environment etc

I think most of us on here generally just judge on the above (apart from the Old course and some of the more memorable ones like Sunningdale etc). Not everyone stays for "high tea" and goes to the short game area, so personally would be fascinated what come out of the above......

Go on,I dares yer.....

I'm not sure where the marks are stored to do that I'm afraid - you're asking a humble equipment writer here after all! - but it's good to know everyone's feedback on things like the weighting so we can make changes to future editions so our rankings represent what matters most to club golfers.

 

[OldMate]

Two courses not in the list, but which must be close are Coombe Hill, and Tandridge. Both Clubs have a special feel about them.

Yep, Tandridge has got to be close to making the list. A few plain holes (the first) and a few towards the end, but most of the other holes are very good. Didn't The Addington rank about #70 last time around? No sign of it on the new list, which I agree with.

 

[Snelly]

I have played 39 of these courses.

I still think that RCD is a lot better than Muirfield and that Sunningdale Old is preferable to the New. Loch Lomond and Moortown are overrated here in my view and I would also swap Swinley and St George's Hill around I think. Belfry and Grove, no thanks.

Highly subjective I agree.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I think the current ranking system provides a top 100 clubs list rather than courses list.

As stated, practice facilities, quality of changing rooms, clubhouse ambience etc are not of huge benefit to visitors, they have greater benefit to the members. If I'm looking for a top course for a day out, I don't really care how big a smile I get from the Mars bar salesman when I pay my green fee, I'm much more interested in a top course in great condition.

 

[Jake O'Reilly]

I would second that, even go further and drop the visual appeal.
There are some great courses in some not so great places. Caister and Dundonald spring to mind.

I think that's definitely a subjective category, as personally I'd much rather play somewhere like Crans-sur-Sierre or Thracian Cliffs in average nick than a resort course like The Belfry in perfect condition.

 

[Foxholer]

I would second that, even go further and drop the visual appeal.
There are some great courses in some not so great places. Caister and Dundonald spring to mind.

Visual appeal certainly warrants inclusion if not the specific weighting imo. Part of the magic of certain courses for me. It's views and vistas that I remember more than many holes for certain courses (eg. Gleneagles, Hindhead, Walton Heath, Hillside and even Batchworth Park!)

I'd certainly be interested in seeing what effect different weightings have on the ratings, though I suspect each area is built up from separate questions each of which contributes pretty much equally to the total, as opposed to a broad 35:30:15:10:10 assessment!

 

[Val]

Just to add to this, our rankings are based on the below, which is why some course like The Belfry and The Grove have featured higher than the course alone may suggest in some of your opinions. You can read about all the criteria in depth, and the panelists involved, in our new issue that goes on sale Thursday:

Quality of test & design (35/100)
Mix of holes, character, does it reward good golf etc

Condition & presentation (30/100)
Tees, greens, different cuts of rough, signage, bunker quality etc

Visual appeal (15/100)
Memorable views, surrounding land, in keeping with its environment etc

Facilities (10/100)
Clubhouse, practice ground, changing rooms, website info etc

Experience (10/100)
Welcome, sense of occasion, value for money, do you want to return etc

Thanks Jake,

If there are 80/100 for everything outwith Facilites and Experience then why are courses like Western Gailes, Blairgowrie listed below some mediocre courses0. I appreciate it can be a bit subjective but it baffles me when courses aren't even listed that are well spoken of in golf circles, Glasgow Gailes and Little Aston were both Open qualifiers, Dundonald is listed as having the potential to hold a Scottish Open, what about Archerfield, is neither course good enough because their facilities are amongst the best out there. What about Wallasey? Bubba Watson thought it that good he played it twice during Open week, it even had Gary Player pay a visit.

This list always creates debate and it's good for that but the amount of quality courses missing from it is baffling.

 

[GeneralStore]

I have played 17 of these, so work to do!

One of the courses that stands out for me is the Addington, with all due respect I think its ok as a course, nothing more. If you want to factor the club as a whole, then it wouldn't even rate it as ok. I am a member at Hindhead which in my opinion is a far better course, much better condition and a better clubhouse and facilities. Would not be a contest between those 2 courses.

I also want to add that I was fortunate enough to play St Georges Hill recently and all I can say is wow! Some of those holes were just awesome. I am sure I will get stick for saying this, but I preferred it to Sunningdale Old Course, thought it was very similar to be fair. Berkshire Red is also lovely, but not quite as nice as SGH.

But Addington? Really? Can someone explain that to me?

 

[matt611]

The link to the "next 100" courses does not seem to be working

 

[Snelly]

I agree about the visual appeal. It is crucial for me. As is the amount of man made noise actually - Hankley over the Berkshire for this reason alone for me in fact.

I am not typical though. The quality of the wine list and waitress hotness levels are also personal considerations of mine. For example, Royal Eastbourne is an absolute dump but a beautiful waitress there once showed me her bow backed knickers and I can't wait to play again.

Similarly, I really don't like Wentworth at all but the Astrolab Reisling that they have makes it almost bearable.

 

[matt611]

I'm pleased County Sligo is back in the list, cracking Colt links course. Now if only to get more recognition for the other courses in the area

 

[Liverbirdie]

I'm not sure where the marks are stored to do that I'm afraid - you're asking a humble equipment writer here after all! - but it's good to know everyone's feedback on things like the weighting so we can make changes to future editions so our rankings represent what matters most to club golfers.

Awwwwwwww come on, I'm sure someone at GM towers has "The Red File".

We're not saying that it should be done differently for future editions, just that it would be very interesting to see, as most of the "subjective debates" tend to focus around the course only, so would be good to see how the lists compare. Even just give us the big movers or losers.............or do a one-page spread in a future edition, and have a big skull and cross bones on the front.:whoo:

 

[Smiffy]

Royal Eastbourne is an absolute dump but a beautiful waitress there once showed me her bow backed knickers and I can't wait to play again.

You want to get your rump down to Cooden.
Ask RickG about "the tattoo"


And I cannot believe that Beau Desert doesn't appear in the top 100.
An absolute stunner of a course that would command a £2k joining fee if it was situated in Surrey.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

We regularly weep for poor Jezz who has played all 100, and over 650 courses in total!

Did you need someone to help carry the burden...?!

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I'm pleased County Sligo is back in the list, cracking Colt links course. Now if only to get more recognition for the other courses in the area

Enniscrone should be top 10

 

[MikeH]

as ever interesting to hear everyone's thoughts, opinions, views etc

I will post a few answers to questions/responses in due course as I am sure will Jezz. might even ask Rob Smith who is the third member of the senior panel to get involved too

only thing I'd highlight is that as we always say - this list is SUBJECTIVE - ie based on opinion. hence why so many different views. No one is 'right' when it comes to course rannkings. Not us, not even the most opiniated people on here who say ... course A should definitely be above course B.

To get the full insight into the process we use to create the list you'll need to read the issue... or the Top 100 microsite when its fully functioning which hopefully it will be later today

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Mike...while you are online, did you see my email about the forum national competition??

 

[Val]

as ever interesting to hear everyone's thoughts, opinions, views etc

I will post a few answers to questions/responses in due course as I am sure will Jezz. might even ask Rob Smith who is the third member of the senior panel to get involved too

only thing I'd highlight is that as we always say - this list is SUBJECTIVE - ie based on opinion. hence why so many different views. No one is 'right' when it comes to course rannkings. Not us, not even the most opiniated people on here who say ... course A should definitely be above course B.

To get the full insight into the process we use to create the list you'll need to read the issue... or the Top 100 microsite when its fully functioning which hopefully it will be later today

I appreciate he'd be hear forever but it would be good to get a wee Q&A with Jezz on why courses did make the list ahead of those who did.