Latest Golf Digest Top 100

[elwhippy]

Just read the latest list. Just wondered how many of the assessors actually play these courses in preparation for each new list? Some of these courses are so limited access it seems improbable that a shed load of non members turn up and critique the most private clubs. 

[jph4387]

I read the credentials and it had something about each rater has to play it at least every ten years?  This tells me they're not playing the best courses annually.

[Abh159]

2 minutes ago, jph4387 said:

I read the credentials and it had something about each rater has to play it at least every ten years?  This tells me they're not playing the best courses annually.

 

Here is the exact quote:

 

Our course-ranking panel has grown to more than 1,900 representatives who evaluate roughly 1,600 candidate courses throughout the United States and Canada. This volume is necessary because a baseline number of evaluations, collected over a rolling 10-year period, are required for any course to appear on our rankings..."

[Dancin]

The annual GD list is a joke. The other magazine lists are much more accurate for my tastes. They also momentarily released the raw data and it turns out the editors fudged quite a few of the positions moving courses up and down from where they should have been based on the raw score. I believe they removed the raw data shortly after it was discovered. There's a thread on GCA about it.

 

We have this highly detailed process but in the end our editors can put courses wherever they want.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Dancin

[sabram]

Here's an interesting thread on this topic:  https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,69674.0.html

[Dancin]

Shackelford really rips it apart. Even the people at GD know their ratings suck as they complained to their raters that they are doing it wrong. They get people who know little about golf other than what the course looks like when they want people to pay $1300 for the privilege of being a rater.

 

https://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2021/5/3/golf-digest-course-ranking-2021-you-get-what-you-charge-for

[thatbaseballguy22]

Regardless of what is "correct" or "accurate", still fun to look through all of these courses. I even happen to live just two or three minutes from one, but will probably never get the chance to play it. Unfortunate, but it does look great on the drive by!

[StudentGolfer4]

The list seems more like an advertisement than anything. A name and a photo don’t do much for me. If you look at the raw data between 50-125 it’s all very close. As someone else mentioned the rankings don’t even have to match up with the data. Let’s actually talk golf courses instead of arbitrary rankings. What makes Camargo (43) better than The Golf Club (44). Better yet, throw Muirfield in there and let’s discuss those Ohio course. 
 

Pete Dye’s name is on the list a lot. What makes Pete Dye GC, Sawgrass, Blackwolf Run, and Oak Tree, top 100 while Crooked Stick barely misses the mark?

[Abh159]

14 hours ago, Dancin said:

Shackelford really rips it apart. Even the people at GD know their ratings suck as they complained to their raters that they are doing it wrong. They get people who know little about golf other than what the course looks like when they want people to pay $1300 for the privilege of being a rater.

 

https://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2021/5/3/golf-digest-course-ranking-2021-you-get-what-you-charge-for

 

Interesting read, and unfortunately not all that surprising. The general golfing public has always been much more concerned with whether or not a course is "pretty" than they are with layout, routing, and how it actually plays. 

[vallygolf]

Greatest list is irrelevant IMO.  100 public greatest is much more appealing.  As mentioned before providing access to private courses for review creates a scenario where it cannot be done objectively.  A person walking onto Pine Valley vs Pinehurst will never be a fair fight and it has much less to do with golf merit than it should.  

[golfday]

5 hours ago, vallygolf said:

Greatest list is irrelevant IMO.  100 public greatest is much more appealing.  As mentioned before providing access to private courses for review creates a scenario where it cannot be done objectively.  A person walking onto Pine Valley vs Pinehurst will never be a fair fight and it has much less to do with golf merit than it should.  

 

I didn't like the latest Top 100 you can play list on Golf.Com. They brought in Canada, Mexico, Caribbean, etc. so now the list is mostly overpriced resorts. I preferred when there were really good $150 and under regional courses on the list that I could find and play. For me that was things like Bulle Rock and Golden Horseshoe that won't find their way back on this list.

[StudentGolfer4]

@golfday I get that sentiment a bit as it applies to the lower ranked and lesser known courses around. But really wasn’t it primarily a list of really expensive resort courses already? Pebble Beach, Kiawah, Pinehurst, Sand Valley, Whistling Straights, Bandon Dunes, Sea Island, etc. Even a lot of the slightly less expensive (all relative I know, courses were resort style. French Lick, Arcadia, Forest Dunes, Reynolds Lake, Etc. 

 

I have always found the best in state list much more useful. Plus, I can form opinions on the list knowing that I have played most of them. 

 

 

[hammergolf]

Any list that has Pasatiempo rated #98 is obviously bad..... 

[Young Provolone]

Golf Digest rankings are a joke. For the most part I feel like Golf.com & GolfWeek usually get it right and are somewhat similar. However the most recent rankings from each seem to contradict each other way more than recent years. I wish Top100GC would release a public list because they seem to be the most spot on for in state rankings in states I’m familiar with.

[DoubleorQuits]

19 hours ago, hammergolf said:

Any list that has Pasatiempo rated #98 is obviously bad..... 

Agreed, nice enough course but not Top 100.  

[Soloman1]

I want to build a course that no one can play - ever. Not even me.

 

I predict it would be in the top 10 in no time since it will be so exclusive.

 

 

[hammergolf]

3 hours ago, DoubleorQuits said:

Agreed, nice enough course but not Top 100.  

There aren’t 97 better golf courses than Pasa in this country. And definitely not the courses at MPCC. 

[StudentGolfer4]

3 hours ago, DoubleorQuits said:

Agreed, nice enough course but not Top 100.  

I haven’t played it so can’t weigh in but this goes back to my earlier point about needing dialogue. In your mind, why isn’t it a top 100 course? What needs to be done to elevate it to that level? From what I have heard it’s a terrific MacKenzie design with world class green and bunker complexes. I’ve heard numerous people argue that if it was on Long Island, private, and hosted numerous majors it could be top 25 easily. 
 

For what it’s worth MacKenzie, says it’s his finest course. He also designed Augusta National, Royal Melbourne, and Cyprus Point. 
 

Out of curiosity have you played a large portion of the top 100? Given my limited experience I find it difficult to say what is or isn’t top 100 without having played 40-50 of them. 

[raynorfan1]

1 hour ago, StudentGolfer4 said:

I’ve heard numerous people argue that if it was on Long Island, private, and hosted numerous majors it could be top 25 easily. 

 

To be clear, every course that fits the description "on Long Island, private, and hosted numerous majors" is in the Top 25.

 

Pasa is fine but it's not inappropriately rated at ~100.

[putterboy75]

On 5/5/2021 at 6:45 PM, thatbaseballguy22 said:

Regardless of what is "correct" or "accurate", still fun to look through all of these courses. I even happen to live just two or three minutes from one, but will probably never get the chance to play it. Unfortunate, but it does look great on the drive by!

Too bad no one has figured out how to play sufficiently in the total darkness, then we'd have a chance to maybe play all "top 100" whatever that means! But would it actually count if you did play in the dark? You have to stay after it and figure out a way to play whatever course this is! Befriend a caddy or buy groceries at the store closest to the course where you think most people go after ... or something.. if there's a will, there's a way!

[putterboy75]

10 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

I want to build a course that no one can play - ever. Not even me.

 

I predict it would be in the top 10 in no time since it will be so exclusive.

 

 

Cherokee Plantation in South Carolina... look it up. Didn't see a soul the entire round (or a divot / ball mark)

[thatbaseballguy22]

9 hours ago, putterboy75 said:

Too bad no one has figured out how to play sufficiently in the total darkness, then we'd have a chance to maybe play all "top 100" whatever that means! But would it actually count if you did play in the dark? You have to stay after it and figure out a way to play whatever course this is! Befriend a caddy or buy groceries at the store closest to the course where you think most people go after ... or something.. if there's a will, there's a way!

You’re right, but these people probably have people to shop for their groceries! Right now, as bad as I am, wouldn’t want to play yet. Need to get my game respectable first but hopefully can make some connections at some point to get on.

[putterboy75]

2 hours ago, thatbaseballguy22 said:

You’re right, but these people probably have people to shop for their groceries! Right now, as bad as I am, wouldn’t want to play yet. Need to get my game respectable first but hopefully can make some connections at some point to get on.

Keep at it! PM me and I'll do my best to help.

[jvincent]

21 hours ago, StudentGolfer4 said:

Out of curiosity have you played a large portion of the top 100? Given my limited experience I find it difficult to say what is or isn’t top 100 without having played 40-50 of them. 

 

My two cents on the Pasatiempo debate.

 

It's a very nice golf course. Good routing, makes you hit all kinds of different shots. My one arguement against it is that some of the greens are arguably too severe for the speeds that they keep them these days.

 

Depending on which list you look at I've played about 30 of the top 100 you can play and I'd say it belongs.

[hammergolf]

On 5/7/2021 at 6:35 PM, raynorfan1 said:

 

To be clear, every course that fits the description "on Long Island, private, and hosted numerous majors" is in the Top 25.

 

Pasa is fine but it's not inappropriately rated at ~100.

It’s much better than either MPCC courses, and is as good or better than Spyglass. It’s def a top 50 course in my opinion. 

[Chanceman]

That Back 9 at Pasatiempo is awesome. Some of those holes (10,11,12,16,18) are about the most memorable you could play.

[sabram]

Pasatiempo would be in my personal top 100 public courses and most likely also in my top 100 US if I made such lists. Here's a link to a photo tour:

 

 

Edited May 9, 2021 by sabram

[hammergolf]

5 hours ago, sabram said:

Pasatiempo would be in my personal top 100 public courses and most likely also in my top 100 US if I made such lists. Here's a link to a photo tour:

 

 

Longest put I’ve ever made in my life was on #16. Pin was on the back tier on the right side. I fatted my approach on the front left fringe. And I made the putt..... up three tiers, had to be at least 120 feet.

[lefty1984]

The list has become the same 75 or so courses every year, and the majority of them are not budget friendly courses. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, however I wouldn't be surprised if there was an organization method where these guys who vote on the courses get to go play them for comped rounds. I mean if I was getting to play Bandon for nothing, I'd probably rate it extremely high too. 

 

Let me not get carried away. I just think the system really misses the mark. Most of us want to know what courses we are missing out on that we could go out and play next week, or next month on vacation, and be able to do so not breaking the bank. We all know Pebble Beach. We all know The Ocean Course at Kiawah. We don't all know Heritage Club in Pawley's Island, or River's Edge in Shallotte, NC, or Virtues Golf Club in Hanover, Ohio. If I was going to take a vacation to Michigan, I'd love to know in my area where there may be a really nice course for $75 or less that I can go enjoy. 

[hammergolf]

1 hour ago, lefty1984 said:

The list has become the same 75 or so courses every year, and the majority of them are not budget friendly courses. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, however I wouldn't be surprised if there was an organization method where these guys who vote on the courses get to go play them for comped rounds. I mean if I was getting to play Bandon for nothing, I'd probably rate it extremely high too. 

 

Let me not get carried away. I just think the system really misses the mark. Most of us want to know what courses we are missing out on that we could go out and play next week, or next month on vacation, and be able to do so not breaking the bank. We all know Pebble Beach. We all know The Ocean Course at Kiawah. We don't all know Heritage Club in Pawley's Island, or River's Edge in Shallotte, NC, or Virtues Golf Club in Hanover, Ohio. If I was going to take a vacation to Michigan, I'd love to know in my area where there may be a really nice course for $75 or less that I can go enjoy. 

Exactly, it’s like a bag tag popularity test vs the actual RATING of the golf course. I said this many times before, and will continue to say, Pebble Beach is an average golf course on a wonderful piece of land. If that golf course was 5 miles inland, it wouldn’t be in the top 500 in the country. I think they should just changed the name to the top 100 most popular golf courses. I went on a golf trip to Chicago in October. Was very excited to play Medinah #3. Honestly, it was not even close to being the best golf course we played. But it had the hype because of the events that had been held there. I’ve been fortunate to play many of the top rated courses, as well as formally being a rather for another golf publication. Everyone tends to have their likes and dislikes as well as how they judge a golf course. But popularity or “exclusivity” should not be part of the rating.