-
Posts
-
Golf Australia magazine published their full top 100 list yesterday: https://www.golfaustralia.com.au/feature/ranking-australias-top-100-courses-for-2020-537630
Thought it might be interesting to see people’s comments on the list, their experiences with these courses and any courses that you deem worthy/not worthy of inclusion.
Rankings are always subjective and depend on the criteria (which may not line up with how you value the experience of playing a course). So try to be positive rather than just trash one course or another.
Take note of the”next 25″ section for those stiff to miss out. Also take note of the “where is” section that explains why courses such as Yarra Yarra, Cathedral Lodge, Capital, Kilara, WAGC, Castle Hill aren’t there.
Personally I will be playing #2,#3,#4 and #15 in a few months time, all for the first time. So quite excited about that.
Cheers
CSHighlights that I need to be out playing golf more often. Quick scan through the list identified 32 of the courses I’ve played. Really interested in Peninsular Kingswood coming in so high that was a surprise. Also the order of the National courses.
The historical ranking has always been Moonah then Old then Ocean. Seems the transformation of Ocean to Gunamatta has elevated it to the best of the three.
Drilling down, quite a few courses with renovations in last 10 years or so have been elevated – common denominator seems to be a Doak/RGD or OCCM renovation, see the likes of Royal Canberra, Peninsula, Concord, National Gunamatta, port fairy, Curlewis, Bonnie Doon.On PK and in particular PK north, Mike Clayton has often said that it has the second best land (RMW having the best) of all the sandbelt and samdbelt-adjacent clubs. So not surprised it’s come out so well,both in the rankings and among people who have played it
Some stunning pictures in there.
Really makes me want to play some of the iconic and scenery courses.
Not sure my game is up for scoring well on them though. Would have to be a day out just enjoying the scenery and course rather than trying to score well.
By the time you realise this part of my signature doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
Success is the ability to go from one failure to the next without any loss of enthusiasm.
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement.
Meditation makes doing nothing quite respectable.
Can’t believe Eynesbury was above Yarrawonga (Murray) …or that it even made the top 100.
•Inaugural Victorian OOM Putting Champion - Long Island 2011
•Inaugural ... National champ
•Hole In One - 7th Hole Portsea GC - 9/10/2012
Best ever score off the stick - 74 (Gardiners Run 10/12/2020)
Masters Champion 11/4/20222 users liked this post.
Whats interesting to me is the fall of the StJohn Course at Heritage, the one designed by Jack Nicklaus. Only 8 years (and 4 ranking cycles) ago in the 2012 rankings it was ranked as 57. Its now not even mentioned in the top 125. I wonder if this is all down to conditioning, and change in criteria or changing tastes/ideas as to what makes a good golf course.
Very subjective list indeed…working at Elanora (48) I am a bit bewildered by the comment of “It’s a shame that all three of the short par-4s play, to varying degrees, uphill. The relief they could provide to an otherwise relentless test is missing as a result.” …who wants piss easy holes?
If they were downhill they’d be long par 3’s! The 3rd, is rated easiest hole on course, so there’s a bit of relief on the relentless test! Your drive on the 8th is the determining factor to a good score there. The structure of the green makes up for the shortness of the hole on 14. All of them are driveable to the gorillas.
How Belmont comes in at 94 and beats 6 other courses is mind boggling, there are far better courses in (Sydney) NSW than Belmont that didn’t make the list.
Anyway, no doubt, the Golf Digest list will be different again to this one.
STILL FUCKING CAPTAIN
Inaugural L4G NSW OOM Round Winner
First Eagle in L4G (NSW) history
2020 Inawgrial L4G NSW OOM Winner
In a past life:
2012 National Championships...Inaugural Supreme Putting Champion
2013 Brass Yacht Winner (Inaugural)
2014 Brass Yacht Winner
2015 Brass Yacht Runner-up
2016 Brass Yacht Winner
2017 Brass Yacht Winner
2018 Brass Yacht Winner
2019 Brass Yacht Winner
2022 Brass Yacht Winner
2023 Brass Yacht Runner-upThe AGD rankings were released in full this week. Having not played many of these and recognising that everyone values different things (including play on the day) I wont opine on merits. I also havent read the article to see the criteria or number of raters etc, nor reasons why some werent ranked. But perhaps some observations in comparing the AGD and GA lists:
StAndrews beach ranked 14 places higher in GA than AGD (12 vs 26)
National Gunamatta not ranked at all in AGD
Port Fairy ranked 26 places higher in GA than AGD (31 vs 57)
Concord ranked 14 places higher in GA than AGD (32 vs 46) – maybe AGD played the pre-reno version?
Portsea ranked 18 places higher in GA than AGD (34 vs 52)
Joondalup quarry/dunes 19 places lower GA than AGD (37 vs 18). Is Joondalup a top 20 course in Aus??
The Australian ranked 19 places lower on GA than AGD (40 vs 21) – is the Australian a top 25 course in Australia??
Eastern South ranked 39 places higher on GA than AGD (55 vs 94)
The Cut ranked 23 places lower on GA than AGD (59 vs 36)
Sanctuary Lakes ranked 30 places higher GA than AGD (60 vs 90)
Healsville ranked 25 places higher on GA than AGD (61 vs 86)
The two most glaring:
Ranfurlie not ranked at all on AGD, on GA its 60
West Australian not ranked at all on GA, on AGD its 56
The common theme in a lot of these seems to be GA ranks a lot of Victoria courses higher than AGD does. Some state based biases here one way or another?
Clearly this is a list with Judges who align themselves in their thinking. This list lacks the credibility of AGD and its easy to criticise where some of the courses are rated.
For instance KH and RM.
Ocean Dunes CW and the courses at BBD.This list lacks continuity of thought and does not deserve being published. The panelists are not necessarily quality Golfers for example, while Mollica is well read and a capable writer he is a foot specialist. I do not understand how a Magazine rates courses and allows this type of critic. The task should be left to either Pro’s or scratch markers and course architects. Even then there will be obvious bias.
Take the ratings for what they are. Someone’s opinion. We all have opinions..
1 user liked this post.
Sure. Not sure anyone suggests they are anything more than opinion, particularly since the sample size in terms of raters is relatively low.
The rankings are a discussion starter, a good marketing tool for clubs, courses and architects and a way to learn about new places to play.
Not sure I agree that pros and scratch markers should have sole domain. Golf courses are for all and most are probably too short for pros these days. The classic courses were designed for the distances in their day, which are now close to how far the average player hits it with the newer technology equipment.
And the newer daily fee courses need the cash so keep their options open.
A good test of a course in my view is whether it’s playable and enjoyable for the average player. Not the same as easy.Sure. Not sure anyone suggests they are anything more than opinion, particularly since the sample size in terms of raters is relatively low.
The rankings are a discussion starter, a good marketing tool for clubs, courses and architects and a way to learn about new places to play.
Not sure I agree that pros and scratch markers should have sole domain. Golf courses are for all and most are probably too short for pros these days. The classic courses were designed for the distances in their day, which are now close to how far the average player hits it with the newer technology equipment.
And the newer daily fee courses need the cash so keep their options open.
A good test of a course in my view is whether it’s playable and enjoyable for the average player. Not the same as easy.Your last sentence makes the most sense of all the conversation on this topic. Being able to enjoy the layout of the course, the aesthetics of the course and enjoying a course for the majority, not just the elite 5% is very important in how a course is rated. i dare say half of the courses in the list are not able to be accessed by Mr Joe Public.
Sure. Not sure anyone suggests they are anything more than opinion, particularly since the sample size in terms of raters is relatively low.
The rankings are a discussion starter, a good marketing tool for clubs, courses and architects and a way to learn about new places to play.
Not sure I agree that pros and scratch markers should have sole domain. Golf courses are for all and most are probably too short for pros these days. The classic courses were designed for the distances in their day, which are now close to how far the average player hits it with the newer technology equipment.
And the newer daily fee courses need the cash so keep their options open.
A good test of a course in my view is whether it’s playable and enjoyable for the average player. Not the same as easy.I agree. The best course should offer a challenge to handicap players, not an impossible dream nor a walkover.
For scratch players, their challenge will be to score under par as though competing against other scratchies. They may well find some holes easy but they are the holes offering a sub-par possibility.
Fairway bunkers can be placed out of range of lesser golfers but requiring skilled players to choose options about how to best play the hole.People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.
No championships worth mentioning in recent years.
Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity.How many raters actually visited the courses over the last 2 years?
Actually we all pretty much know the answer, Covid has meant no-one could have travelled in the 2 year period since the last review.
How can raters actually have rated the courses if they could not travel to inspect the courses?1 user liked this post.
How many raters actually visited the courses over the last 2 years?
Actually we all pretty much know the answer, Covid has meant no-one could have travelled in the 2 year period since the last review.
How can raters actually have rated the courses if they could not travel to inspect the courses?They probably just ask the locals if their course is better or not as good as when it was last visited.
People say that nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.
No championships worth mentioning in recent years.
Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity.Probably who gives the greatest kickbacks?
All jokes aside, pretty sure there is a fairly large panel of golfers ranging in handicap that they use for these. They’re usually listed somewhere at the end of the list. I’ve met a few of them, those guys were just avid golfers really. We’ve had domestic travel in the last 2 years, and there would be testers that live in different parts of the country as well.
Otherwise who cares about the rankings, go out and enjoy some golf!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
