Tell us what you think of the 2009 Top 100 Courses List
Posted at 9:39 AM by Charlie Hanger | Categories:
Top 100 Courses in the U.S. and World
GOLF Magazine's Top 100 Courses in the U.S. and the Top 100 in the World lists are out, so now it's time for the debate to begin. Tell us what you think in the comments section below.
More Top 100: New courses in the Top 100 | 10 courses to watch | Top 100 Courses Home
Posted by: Greg | Sep 9, 2009 4:36:51 AM
I don't know if this is common knowledge, but some of the rock around the 15th green at Cypress Point is not real. There had been significant erosion over the years. And speaking of erosion, part of the the right side of the 17th fairway is missing. There used to be more room to play to the right of the stand of cypress trees (which at one time were surrounded by bunkers). Finally, the original plan was to have the 18th tee perched out on the rocks. It would have made the hole more interesting. The 18th is also missing it's original fairway bunkering.
Posted by: herrsonic | Sep 9, 2009 1:19:43 PM
The list hasn't changed much in 20 years, and as usual not terribly useful information. Yet people are fascinated by lists.
Posted by: Golferdude | Sep 9, 2009 3:02:24 PM
I think this is in many ways a list of the best Golf "Clubs" and not always just about the course. For instance, Camargo is a very nice course but it's an extremely elite Country Club and I think that is what most people are intrigued by. I'm not sure the course is the best in Cincinnati, let alone a top 100.
Posted by: Jim Stevens | Sep 9, 2009 3:22:34 PM
I find it interesting that Bandon, Or. doesn't have a PGA event. How can you have a top 10 course year after year and yet be ignored by the "golf gods"
Posted by: nathan | Sep 9, 2009 3:38:44 PM
is it just me or does an list w/o Augusta being #1 just silly?
Posted by: Breandan | Sep 9, 2009 3:43:52 PM
I think this list is pretty biased towards US courses. There are only two Canadian courses on the list...way down the list! Obviously not enough time was spent scouting courses like "The National" or "Banff Springs" ETC.
Posted by: eric | Sep 9, 2009 4:21:00 PM
how can you not have quail hollow on your list? if you ask any of the top 100 pros, they tell you its one of the top 5 courses in the country, and it must be that good if they are considering making the course into a major? who ever made this list needs to re check big time, must be the courses they like instead!!
Posted by: RWalden | Sep 9, 2009 4:41:37 PM
The only top 100 courses I care about are the ones open to the public
Posted by: Klas | Sep 9, 2009 5:18:23 PM
They surely forgot about Bro Hof Slott Golf Club in Sweden, who is hoping for the Ryder Cup in 2018. That is an amazing course!
Posted by: Klas | Sep 9, 2009 5:21:21 PM
Bro Hof Slott Golf Club, Stadium Course, is clearly missing. It targets the Ryder Cup in 2018, an amazing layout!
Overall, the list is too focused on the U.S. when ranking world courses.
Posted by: Greg | Sep 9, 2009 9:43:30 PM
My top 10 would be the following:
1) Royal County Down
2) Pine Valley
3) Royal Dornoch
4) Cypress Point
5) Shinnecock Hills
6) Royal Melbourne (West)
7) Sand Hills
8) NGLA
9) Pacific Dunes
10) Prairie Dunes
Posted by: Jordo | Sep 9, 2009 9:46:53 PM
no love for Canada. I think more of the courses need to be played: The National for one
Posted by: overthetop | Sep 9, 2009 10:27:18 PM
Why drool over private clubs? I'll never play those and don't care about them. The public ones are a different story.
Posted by: Steve | Sep 9, 2009 11:42:31 PM
I agree with many of the comments that it's no use to have a list that is primarily super-exclusive private clubs... in fact, to me the most interesting list would be a "top 100 under 100" list. That is top 100 courses that offer daily non-member play with green fees under $100. That list would actually provide me some utility as I look to find new and interesting courses to play. As far as I'm concerned, a public course with $500 green fees might as well be Augusta National in terms of me ever playing it.
Posted by: Al | Sep 10, 2009 12:09:55 AM
I have to agree with Breandan and Jordo. I haven't played enough of these courses to rank them but the few I have played can't top the National.
Posted by: frank | Sep 10, 2009 9:14:22 AM
Pros list Quail Hollow as a top 5 tournament, not course. Quail Hollow isn't even the best course in Charlotte.
Posted by: Charlie Hanger, GOLF.com editor | Sep 10, 2009 10:24:31 AM
Hi all: For those looking for public tracks, see our special section for the Top 100 You Can Play: golf.com/golf/special_feature/0,31941,1902037,00.html
Posted by: Snaphook | Sep 10, 2009 11:10:59 AM
The top 100 in the world list is pretty useless. It states 1 or 2 mainland Europe courses, which aren't even in the top 20 European Courses over here. Valderrama is in there just to give readers an idea that time has been spent on this thing. While in reality not even half the courses have been considered or looked at. Furthermore I agree with a lot of comments; hyper expensive public courses aren't even of interest to me. Next time invest time in playing more courses, even if they don't come up on any pro-tour schedule.
Posted by: Mark Jasayko | Sep 10, 2009 12:22:38 PM
Here's my top ten:
1. Royal Dornoch (Championship)
2. Royal County Down
3. Turnberry (Ailsa)
4. New South Wales
5. Pebble Beach
6. North Berwick
7. St. Andrews (Old)
8. Muirfield
9. Pacific Dunes
10. Whistling Straits.
Because of the existence of uber-private facilities in the U.S., there is just not a level playing field in which to assess the courses of the world. It would probably be straight to hell for me if I had the wealth or connections to get on some of those tracks.
Also, I sense that some of the Golf Magazine raters are probably a little enamoured with the honor of playing some of the super private courses. Case in point, imagine if Cypress Point was a resort course and Pebble was the super private course with the threatening trespassing signs. The golfing world would go absolutely crazy if it had no access to be able to play that stretch from No.6 to No. 10, and then No. 17 and No. 18. Comparing that to a rocky short par 3 and then a long par three with a fairway wood needed to carry the ocean, the epic stretch at Pebble would win every time. Slow play and lousy caddies at Pebble should not be a consideration when evaluating the essense of the course itself.
With respect to Royal Dornoch being number one in the world - imagine if that track was near a major US city and was totally private!!! It simply is the best collection of 18 holes on one property on the planet. AND, there is even daylight between it and the next in line.
Finally, golf is a seaside game. Inland parkland golf is a derivative of what golf really is. As a result, under a ten-point must system like they have in boxing, one point needs to be automatically deducted from tracks such as Pine Valley, Augusta National, etc.
That's that.
Posted by: Johnny Nucleo | Sep 10, 2009 1:02:50 PM
I agree with other posters that lists are in general fairly useless and probably a disservice to many very good courses that don't have the tournament history that others have. Case in point - Cherry Hills. I've played it 20+ times, and it was redesigned last year. It's not in very good condition at the moment (although that will improve), and virtually everyone that has played it (including several members I've talked to) believes the front 9 is much worse (and much easier) than it was before the redesign, and frankly feels like a muni in places. The back 9 is very nice, but there is no way this is among the best 100 courses in the US. The panelists either have not played CH recently or haven't given this any serious thought. Taking away the clubhouse and majors held there, this would be a pretty nice country club with a few great holes. But not in the top 100.
Posted by: bob | Sep 10, 2009 3:06:57 PM
Rating golf courses is a little like the male attraction to women. There's a generality that most people can agree upon but beyond that is highly subjective and arguing one vs. another often a waste of time. The top 20 or 30 are fairly clear , but when you get to the second half of the US top 100 we can all argue merits or weaknesses of the group. The weighing in pretty biased, but the guys offering up their top 10 have chosen courses they've played. If you've played 80 or 90 of the top 100, your opinion is probably more objective.. The only thing that really matters is, get out there, play these courses, enjoy the experience and count your blessings you are part of the small % that has the health, time and resources to have this privilege. ENJOY
Posted by: Bob | Sep 10, 2009 4:50:38 PM
You are splitting hairs at these levels - most of the courses rated here are great tracks but it really comes down to personal preference. No one would be disappointed to play any of them.
I have been fortunate to have played half of the top 40 on this particular list. For instance I really do not like the Ocean Course at Kiawah (not in my personal top 100) and I think Baltrusol is as the most unmemorable golf course of any highly ranked course I have ever played. In my opinion if it were located further away from New York City it would be much lower on the list.
As for Pebble Beach, I think it is one of the top settings in all of golf, and the course has maybe the best stretch of holes I have ever played (7, 8, 9, 10) and 18 is a great risk reward hole but I think the golf course is average overall as a test of golf and gets its ratings significantly inflated as course rankers mistake setting for quality of golf holes. I would never pay my own money to play at Pebble Beach again but I will sure as hell walk around the course with my camera.
Many of the posters here are correct in pointing out that most golfers will never get to play these clubs which really is sad. Maybe Golf Magazine should have a series of regional contests and the winners get to play 3 of the nearest top 100 courses on the list. I am sure the host clubs would be honored to help out the very magazine that gives them such fantastic recognition with a couple of free foursomes on a monday morning.
Posted by: aaron | Sep 10, 2009 6:02:52 PM
A course that needs to be on one of your lists somewhere is Bull Valley Golf Club. One of the great golf challenges you will ever face.
Posted by: Chuck | Sep 10, 2009 11:35:53 PM
What purpose does a list of courses you probably no chance of playing serve. An ordinary player probably has no chance to even see a course like Pine Valley. How about the top 100 courses you can play, now that would be useful.
Posted by: steve | Sep 11, 2009 6:07:13 AM
Though I don't agree with all the rankings, I feel the panel of Golf Magazine is a pretty qualified group. Look how many familiar names are on it.