Augusta (Fittingly) Remains #1 In The Eyes Of The Golf Digest Panel

Longtime readers know I've never been a fan of the Golf Digest panel's architectural intuition, starting back when they debuted Shadow Creek in the top 10 in 1993. And now that I'm a member of the family, well, it's still not a secret that I think the panel needs to be shed of lots of dead weight that is tainting the work of those who take the evaluation of architecture and playability seriously.

The emphasis of the panel continues to focus on hard, expensive and exclusive courses, so fittingly the panel keeps Augusta #1 in America. There are two certified howlers in the top 20, the annual Fazio designed, over-hyped club for the elite that in ten years will be clinging to a second fifty spot (The Alotian Club). And the bloated Whistling Straits, which no one in the right mind wants to play more than once.

A slideshow reveals the top 20, the full list debuts April 5th.

Comments

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

So, how exactly does one go about getting on that panel? I'm available. LOL.

[Jim]

Whitten is the problem. He assumes he knows the exact formula for what makes a golf course great. Last time i checked, golf courses don't all fit the same formula. The other publications let the raters decide what's important to them, and the result is a overall ranking that is accurate reflection of that collective opinion. I don't know if you can say the same for Gold Digest.

[RickABQ]

Again, I respectfully disagree on Whistling Straits if you are a player who doesn't spray the ball around too much and you play the right set of tees. I had a blast there and would love to play it again, but I am also a player who hits a lot of fairways and greens, and doesn't mind getting beaten up some on a major-venue course. It makes me appreciate even more what the pros can do on a course like that. I can, however, see how it could be really depressing for someone who has difficulty controlling the ball. Or, perhaps, I am not in my right mind - you would not be the first person to draw that conclusion.

[OB]

Don't blame Whitten, blame whoever makes it only single digit handicappers or folks claiming to be good players. They are the worst judges of design for the masses.

[DavidC]

If Rich Harvest Links is still on the list, I won't even bother to look at it.

[Hawkeye]

Is it just me, or do the pictures from Winged Foot and Chicago CC show the same hole?

[JRP]

I don't know a lot of things....but I do know that there is no way that picture is the 6th hole at Chicago Golf.

I am alos going to duck and cover here....but I think sans the 5th, 6th and 9th holes......Whistling Straits is a great golf course. Yes, I said great. I love playing there.

[Sir Hack-a-Lot]

Can't really see the value in ranking a bunch of courses that most people can never play because they are either private or priced beyond the avg. golfers golfing budget...Give me a list of the top public course or Muni's ....

[Smitty]

@Sir Hack-a-Lot,

Here, here!

BTW, I am coming out with a book that has all the locations that a normal person can play MacKenzie, Ross, & Tillinghast--I'll make sure Geoff features it prominently on this website . . .

[Donald]

That can't be so. I have the best courses because of who I am and all the money I spent and because of my knowledge............

[d.b.cooper]

National Golf Links made a nice jump to make the top 10.

Somewhat surprised PH #2 didn't make the top 20.

Shinnecock and Oakmont at #3 and #4 could just as easily be #1 and #2, imo.

That fairway in the background of the Merion photo is just too narrow. Probably about how the USGA will have it in 2013 to protect the course.

[Jordan]

Smitty:

Your book sounds great. These rankings used to interest me. Till I had the same thought as Sir Hack-a-Lot. I've never played and will never play 90% of the courses. So why bother losing sleep over the fact that Muirfield Village is in the Top 20 but Riviera isn't?

[Homel Heeb]

Riviera was left out again! I talked to the owner, a guy named Mike, and he says his course should
be right up there with Pine Valley. As a matter of fact, he said, Riviera nickname is PineWest.

[Moshe Dyan]

They forgot about all the Trump courses. Mr. Trump says, (and the pictures I've seen bear this out) that his
courses are some of the finest in the world. I agree the staff of raters should be scrapped, and new ones
chosen by you Geoff. Where do I send my application?

[GolfFan]

"Augusta (Fittingly) Remains #1 In The Eyes Of The Golf Digest Panel"

Geoff, Can you elaborate on that?

Thanks

[Homel Heeb]

Why didn't L.A. Country Club get in? I've been told they do not even let you on their turf unless
your shoes are sterilized in an ion chamber they have! Sounds pretty nice to me..Maybe Geoff can
have some of his rater apprentices go through the guidlines w/ a round at L.A. "North!"

[golf pro]

My main problem with the list is dealing with the people that rank the courses. They want everything for "FREE" We had a call for a guy to come out and play and rate our course and we said sure. When he got there and we told him the price, he said that he was a golf digest rater and we said that is great, we will love to hear what you think, but the price is sitll the same. He was mad and I think that is why we are not higher on the list of public courses in our state. Until the courses stop kissing these raters butts, the list will never be good.

[Loopin For The Lama]

I wrote a comment on this post earlier today, but it got accidentally (according to Geoff) deleted.

Honestly I can't remember what I wrote. It was pretty long.

Sir-Hack-A-Lot, Golf Magazine ranks the top 100 courses you can play (resorts, munis publics etc.) On their site they also rank courses in each state.

As far as these rankings go, I don't really have a problem with it in general. I can understand that playability has something to do with good architecture, but I don't think a course needs to be playable by your weekend golfer (100+ shooter) to be a well designed course.

I'm sure I'd shoot a lot higher than normal at many of these ultra-long, very difficult courses. But I don't think that means they are necessarily poorly designed.

I'm not sure why OB says that single digits are the worst judges of course architecture.

I also don't think price and exclusivity mean that a course is poorly designed. However, as Geoff states, the panel at GD might buy into some of the hype of these courses.

As for ranking courses as a whole, I don't understand how someone can say that great course A is better or worse than great course B.

My original comment was better. Oh well.

[d.b.cooper]

@golf pro,

Good for you!

[James H.]

Geoff - do you have a personal view of Alotian or is that an assumption?

I know the piece of ground that it is built on is very picturesque.

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

@golf pro: What d.b.cooper says! Haven't been to Bandon yet but I will get there if I live long enough. I still laugh every time I think about how the guy in the pro shop made The King whip out his AmEx Black card (or whatever color his is likely to be) if he wanted to play. But, when Golf Digest calls me to join their august group, I won't be payin' $500 to rate PB or $400 to rate Pinehurst #2. Guess that means they won't be calling...never mind. As for the top end, it's kind of like having to choose between Catherine Deneuve and Grace Kelly and Lee Remick. What difference could it possibly make?

[Longtime Subscriber]

Why Golf Digest insists on pursuing this pointless exercise ANNUALLY is a mystery to me. Something like 90% of the courses on the list have been on it for the last 5 years, so every 5 years is more than enough. Seriously, what percentage of readers care whether a private club they've never played and never will is up or down 3 spots this year? The only people that give a hoot are the members of the clubs and the ranking panel. GD never discloses iwho's on that panel or how they were selected, so I'm betting they're all connected to the publisher, advertisers and what-not. Who else thinks this list exists in part so they can play courses they otherwise never could, and/or for free?