New Golf Digest 2019 Top 100 in USA Rankings are out!

[raynorfan1]

Golf Digest especially sets their rankings up to make it hard for wholesale change. Though their recent changes to criteria seem like an opportunity for a shakeup.

 

The reality is there are a lot of immovable objects on these lists.

 

I'd suggest that no new course, no matter how good ever really has a chance to reach #1 on any list other than maybe the Golf Week Modern list.

 

Very accurate. Friar's Head was #3 on Golfweek's Top 100 Modern by 2014, in contrast to Golf Digest and Golf Magazine's lists, where it very slowly tries to pass the old guard (i.e. country clubs with a long history of championship golf).

 

Golf Digest has Friar’s Head at 19 but with only 1 course (Sand Hills) higher on the list if you only include Modern courses. Augusta is the second newest course on that list built in 1933 that ranks higher than Friar’s Head.

 

I don’t have he list in front of me, but Muirfield Village too, no?

[mci711]

Golf Digest especially sets their rankings up to make it hard for wholesale change. Though their recent changes to criteria seem like an opportunity for a shakeup.

 

The reality is there are a lot of immovable objects on these lists.

 

I'd suggest that no new course, no matter how good ever really has a chance to reach #1 on any list other than maybe the Golf Week Modern list.

 

Very accurate. Friar's Head was #3 on Golfweek's Top 100 Modern by 2014, in contrast to Golf Digest and Golf Magazine's lists, where it very slowly tries to pass the old guard (i.e. country clubs with a long history of championship golf).

 

Golf Digest has Friar's Head at 19 but with only 1 course (Sand Hills) higher on the list if you only include Modern courses. Augusta is the second newest course on that list built in 1933 that ranks higher than Friar's Head.

 

I don't have he list in front of me, but Muirfield Village too, no?

 

Merion as well.

[BNGL]

Cypress is the shortest 6524 (72)..... and a total of 23 tip out at less than 6900

 

Seminole tips out at over 7000 now courtesy of the Coore-Crenshaw renovation last summer.

[BNGL]

A couple neat facts from the GD site on this year's ranking:

 

No. 15 Friar's Head (pictured) and No. 46 Ballyneal are the only two courses that have risen in each of the last five rankings.

 

 

Architect Tom Fazio boasts the most designs in the top 100 (13), including No. 26 Shadow Creek. Pete Dye and Donald Ross are next with nine.

 

 

Gil Hanse boasts the most redesigns in the top 200 with 15, including No. 6 Merion.

 

 

The 1920s produced more 100 Greatest Courses than any other decade with 25, including No. 10 Fishers Island. The 2000s were next with 19.

 

I can only speak to Ballyneal. They've done a lot to the course over the last 5 years including changing the grass and have a new superintendent. The conditions are significantly better to the point it plays completely different than when I played it 4 years ago.

 

Fazio's design seem to have some love among panelists but I think that has more to do with the amount of money the clubs put into the course for not only conditioning but aesthetics as well. For example, I played a Fazio course that has an unlimited budget and my caddie said their budget just for flowers every year is $1M. The other thing Fazio does, is he'll come back to courses often and update the design for the club.

 

What club is that with an unlimited budget?

 

I’m envious is all.

[jaw1978]

The thing I find interesting (or, actually, boring) is how little volatility there is on the list, especially towards the top. Only two courses in the Top 50 moved more than 4 slots - and both were in the 40's (Castle Pines and Camargo). The entire top 50 is separated by 7.5 points...yet there's very little movement. Which points to an incredibly disciplined / structured evaluation process.

 

I think the drive towards consensus, especially around specific pecking order, is bad for the rankings (but maybe good for golf). The only interesting things are big moves (Essex), new entrants (MPCC), and big falls (Sahalee). I also think that Myopia Hunt's ranking has validated their approach towards raters in recent years.

 

It’s largely due to a 10 year cycle. Only two years of ratings are submitted each go around, and those carry less weight than eight years of ratings already in place. It takes time to move unless courses choose to wipe out historical ratings due to a renovation. But then they may be stuck below the minimum rating requirement to be considered for top 200.

[carrera]

Second 100 listed: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/americas-second-100-greatest-golf-courses

 

Clear Creek Tahoe should be in that group.

[PuttLeftHitRight]

Second 100 listed: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/americas-second-100-greatest-golf-courses

 

Clear Creek Tahoe should be in that group.

 

Thanks!

[Roadking2003]

Does anybody know if this data is on the web in list format?

[Dr. Hack]

Anyone else have a strong distaste for this list?

 

There is definitely some truth to the quality of the courses on the list and ratings in general, BUT within the list I think the rankings are entirely subjective and almost certainly biased. Say you get a once in a lifetime chance to play Augusta, Pine Valley, or Cypress.... Are you going to have the guts to leave them a bad review? Doubtful. Pine Valley will be number 1 forever. How boring.

 

I guess I mainly have a problem with a list that has about 15 public courses on it, which is written for and funded by the public. Let the private members take pride in their little ranking game every year...that's all this list is.

 

For whatever it's worth, the golf.com rankings are always much more accurate when talking about courses I know, like the Scottsdale/AZ courses. One would think AZ has not a single course worth playing, by Golf Digest's account.

[az2au]

Anyone else have a strong distaste for this list?

 

There is definitely some truth to the quality of the courses on the list and ratings in general, BUT within the list I think the rankings are entirely subjective and almost certainly biased. Say you get a once in a lifetime chance to play Augusta, Pine Valley, or Cypress.... Are you going to have the guts to leave them a bad review? Doubtful. Pine Valley will be number 1 forever. How boring.

 

I guess I mainly have a problem with a list that has about 15 public courses on it, which is written for and funded by the public. Let the private members take pride in their little ranking game every year...that's all this list is.

 

For whatever it's worth, the golf.com rankings are always much more accurate when talking about courses I know, like the Scottsdale/AZ courses. One would think AZ has not a single course worth playing, by Golf Digest's account.

Absolutely 100% I would leave the review that I believe is appropriate. The course has no visibility to your rating and there is no reason to do anything but be honest. I’ve been fortunate enough to play several of the courses near the top including one that you name but haven’t done evaluations on any of them.

 

I’ll say this, if you go through the training you’d definitely not have the same strong opinion on subjectivity.

[PuttLeftHitRight]

Anyone have the Top 100 public, or has that not been released yet?

 

Seems like a lot of volatility in the 2nd 100. Quite a few clubs dropped big time and many are out completely.

[raynorfan1]

> @PuttLeftHitRight said:

> Anyone have the Top 100 public, or has that not been released yet?

>

> Seems like a lot of volatility in the 2nd 100. Quite a few clubs dropped big time and many are out completely.

 

I believe the volatility in the 2nd 100 is driven mostly by fewer ballots for those courses. The echo chamber leads more raters to play more highly-entrenched courses, which further reinforces the rankings. Fewer raters play the lesser ranked courses, so a handful of ballots could swing the ranking either way (or completely off if they don't get enough ballots to meet the minimum threshold). It's a little unfair that they "drop" clubs for not having enough ballots without explaining that reason...but I understand it.