Top 100 Courses 2017 - Golf Digest Ireland

Its a very elaborate and detailed process but I really have to wonder how some courses get on the list.

The actual sequence is too subjective for minor changes in ranking to be taken too seriously but there's about half a dozen that I wouldn't cross the road to play for free. For example Seapoint, St Annes and Hermitage wouldn't be in my top 250.

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The language was a bit harsh to say the least.

Kevin has done way more for the average punter getting a feel for these places than anyone I have come across in the game in the last 5 years. In any space - online , publishing etc. I've been able to go to any county in the country - pull out his marks and he hasn't sent me wrong once.

Not to mention his photography, that is outstanding and invaluable to the "ordinary golfer".

You know you are in trouble with the average punter when you are not considered an "expert" and are part of the great unwashed "ordinary golfer".

Would you be able to publish what way the rating would be if it was just the 25 % . Would be interesting if different.

It was part of a movement in 2016 - that people are a bit sick of experts - expert groups tend to be influenced by themselves and to a create their own narrative and self importance. Groupthink.

From an "Ordinary golfer" .

I agree that Kevin has done a huge amount to bring good golf courses to the attention of the masses. In fact, where he stands apart is being able to give space to unheralded courses that most haven't given much thought to. The fact that all courses in Hooked get equal space is very important.

Regards the order of the courses if it were just the 25%, you'd be surprised. In my time, they were uncannily close to the main panels ranking. Having studied this a bit, I actually began to understand that the "groupthink" was therefore actually feeding the readers panel more so than the main panel because they were quite clearly being swayed by the main panel results of the year before. In other words, they were adhering to the norms of the way the "experts" led them.... Either that or the experts aren't too far off the mark in the first place...

As for getting sick of experts, well that all depends who those experts are. There are a few on the panel who have no right to be rating courses and then there are others who are intimately knowledgeable.

Clearly, I reckon a listing by me alone is much more informative than one that is neutralised and equalised by a larger group. A rating by Kevin would be the same. Or by Pat Ruddy. Or by Linton. Or by anyone. That way you understand what you're getting and learn which commentators you can trust. Which ones conform to what you like.

As an aside, I reckon that there is and should be a level of objectivity in rating golf courses. If someone does not have the skills to be objective then they have not yet studied or learnt them. It takes time to understand not just whether you like a course or not but exactly why you like a course or not.

Can't bring myself to agree with a lot of these. Druid's Glen is far better than 30th. Old Head is a stunning setting and a great experience to play, but 12th? If the course as it is now was surrounded by fields it wouldn't make the top 50 IMO. Wouldn't rank either Carton House in the top 50 or St. Anne's in the top 100 either.

But everybody to their own I guess. Thanks for posting the link.

thewobbler wrote: »

This is becoming an interesting debate.

In every form of expertise we of course need experts, but the experts tend to be have passions and fascinations that just don't interest the average man, but can (if unchecked) play havoc on their own thought processes.

This is a regular issue in my own discipline (web design) where all too many designers design for designers instead of audiences. Or design to be different, not better. Doing that helps them win awards... but not help their client win customers.

Golf course experts seem drawn to the opposite way of thinking I.e. That no matter how learned and skilled you become, It's not possible to even hope to compare with the work done by men 130 years ago, before drones, earthmovers and irrigation systems appeared.

Part of this comes from a form of golf Darwinism, whereby those that survived the first 50 years of golf's growth undoubtedly had to have something special about them. Part of it comes from the fact that a well-maintained, obviously-loved, mature course is truly one of life's pleasures, and younger courses can do little but wait.

But from my obtuse perspective, I reckon a lot of the classic courses now enjoy a very sympathetic handing from the experts, who will happily gloss over a world of dubiousness and negative points, and concentrate solely on their plus points. Whereas the average Joe might just scratch his head and ask the question "seriously, is it that good at all?".

Hence I think it's vital that the average joe can chip in their opinion.

This is design. Design is subjective.

I think there's also an element of people afraid to call out what is considered a great course if they don't agree that it is. It's a bit like a good wine, some people will dismiss you as not being able to appreciate it if you say anything against it, so a lot of group think is the result.

Linton Walsh wrote: »

Everyone makes mistakes Kevin and you did admit it. My only issue is that in between making your mistake and admitting it, you posted on your blog "Please note that this listing was updated at 2:30pm on Sat 7 Jan, following a late ranking change by the magazine". This implied to all that read it, that the magazine had changed the rankings, which was not the case.A retraction of this false and damaging statement along with apology would have been more appropriate. I see you have done this last night and I appreciate that.

The most damaging statement to the magazine I read was the one you made initially. Harsh language as stated above, rude in tone and a total over-reaction. If something as trivial as this is "damaging" and poses a threat to Golf Digest (it doesn't) then it's in big trouble already. Let it go. Nobody's going to cancel their subscription based on whether something was edited prior to publication or not. But then you know that already.

Played 52 so far with Lahinch, Tralee and Dingle on my hit list for 2017 so if anyone can advise best way to play these courses without forking out €150+ for the privilege!!! Best course I played this year was Enniscrone, always nice to go back there.

ballyk wrote: »

Tralee hold scratch cups every year which are well worth entering. I can't remember exactly what they charge, maybe €40, but much lower than €150 anyway!

I think it was €50 in 2016 for the Junior, Intermediate and €60 for the Senior SC, 18 holes for the JSC and ISC and 54 holes (minimun 36 holes, a cut was applied after 36 holes) for the SSC. I'm not sure if they hold a minor scratch cup.

Ceann Sibeal (Dingle), regularly hold open comps, iirc the entry was €30 in 2016.

Crapgolfer wrote:

Coolattin & Mountrath anyone? Abbeyleix perhaps?

I'm a fan of Coolattin. Only thing holding it back is the primitive clubhouse and services.

First Up wrote: »

Agree. Druids Glen is the best parkland by a country mile - and I would drop Druids Heath about 100 places.

Druids Glen is a great course but you've clearly never played Adare if you think that. Adare was already the top parkland in the country and will put significant daylight between itself and the rest when I reopens at the end of the year.

IMO the par 5's is what lets Druids Glen down a little.

Kevinmarkham wrote: »

The news about Adare is all fabulous and it does sound like it'll be incredible... but the green fees will be shooting up.

Grapvine rumours or reliable sources?

Ally McIntosh wrote: »

Have to say I'm not so enamoured with the idea of Adare being Fazioed. I'm sure it will look beautiful although there's something a little disappointing about the only genuine Robert Trent Jones course in the country being ploughed under.

That said, I haven't seen the work in person nor even in photos. It could be excellent so keen to hear about the changes and how it's shaping up.

I have walked it recently Ally, its a huge show of money spending for one.
But it certainly looks amazing, almost to the point of its literally trying for perfection in every corner.
How possible that ll be in Irelands climate i dont know.... But its a future Ryder cup venue by the sounds of what im hearing.

There are some nice changes, the 18th has been changed, the green now hugs the water more and the front has a fairway for a brave semi lay up shot over the water. The route of some other holes have changed also.