Jump to content


 

Photo

Golf Australia rankings


  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

#31 the_unreal_jeffrey

the_unreal_jeffrey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1928 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:36 AM

Matty,

Well done on putting your neck on the line. It takes guts to put your list out there when it would be far easier to sit back and snipe at others...BUT...Do you really think Moonah Links (Legends) is worse than Horsham, Hintingdale, Royal Sydney etc. I reckon if you average out your rating and Perrets rating, you get the Legends pretty right. Other than that, good job.

BTW. Does anyone else here reckon that perhaps a couple of the new panelists were unaware that their individual ratings would be published.



#32 Jerry Springer

Jerry Springer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1084 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 04:32 PM

Royal Canberra, I played there last year and thought it made a fair comparison to Yarra Bend or Caloundra! It has no place in the top 50.

The other one that has me a little mystified is Barnbougle, are we all that desperate to love a Doak course? It has four brilliant holes (3,4,15,17), 6 good ones, 6 just ok, and 2 stinkers in 5 & 16. I just can't see that NSW, KH, Metro, Victoria, National old and probably a few others shouldn't be above it. I has great views and is spectacular which I must admit is something I really like, but I can't help but feel it is overrated by the panellists.



#33 _Andrew_

_Andrew_

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2337 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 04:45 PM

QUOTE: John J Jones @ Dec 7 2005, 09:35 PM

The end list isn't too bad (Royal Sydney missing out on its God Given Spot at 10 is amazing) but it's a worry about the quality of the "industry" panel when ISG's own Tinea Tamer, the Kite Boy has one of the better lists out of the 11.


JJJ,

That's why I believe less industry people should be used for these lists. I know it would make the right people harder to find, but if they want the best list, then so be it.

Matty, one thing I forgot to say in the PM.

It's good to see you had the guts to rate The Australian, Royal Sydney & The Lakes where they should be. You are really closer to the mark than a majority of the others.



#34 AndyA

AndyA

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1609 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 04:57 PM

JJJ, I don't have a problem with the architects rating their own courses, so long as the vested interests are listed in the magazine. Perhaps they should devote a page at the end of the article to a list of club memberships as well:

eg. Mollica, Oliver and Perrett - The National; Clayton and Perrett - Metropolitan; Berg - Commonwealth; Langford-Jones - Kingston Heath; Harrison - The Australian.

They should also mention that Ramsay has or had a pecuniary interest in Laguna Whitsundays, and presumably has one at Club Pelican, which would explain its extraordinarily high ranking on his list.



#35 spooky

spooky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 05:55 PM

QUOTE: Jerry Springer @ Dec 8 2005, 05:32 AM

Royal Canberra, I played there last year and thought it made a fair comparison to Yarra Bend or Caloundra!  It has no place in the top 50.

The other one that has me a little mystified is Barnbougle, are we all that desperate to love a Doak course?  It has four brilliant holes (3,4,15,17), 6 good ones, 6 just ok, and 2 stinkers in 5 & 16.  I just can't see that NSW, KH, Metro, Victoria, National old  and probably a few others shouldn't be above it.  I has great views and is spectacular which I must admit is something I really like, but I can't help but feel it is overrated by the panellists.

The speccy views have nothing to do with why the gold label of rankings have BD in the top 50 in the world after not even being open for a year, and why the US Golf Digest had it number 6 in Australia 4 months after it opened. It has hole after hole of top notch quality. 6 good, 6 just OK, and 2 stinkers??? Any golf course will have it's detractors but Barnbougle has had pretty much unanimous predictions that it will be in the top 2 in Australia within a few years, and it's not a surprise that 4 of the raters had it at number 2.



#36 judgesmails

judgesmails

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7281 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 06:13 PM

One of the reasons BD should be high is becuase of the way the points were allocated with a fair percentage going to 'Wow' factor. Barny has loads of it and most likely would have scored maximum points in that area.



#37 Moe

Moe

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7146 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 07:06 PM

I like MM's list, but can't help but pick at a few ratings.

Commonwealth, Metro and Yarra Yarra - these are all far better golf courses than Brookwater. I guess it's har to balance, because you don't want to be seen to just put all the Melbourne courses at or near the top, but Brooky is definately behind C'Wealth and Metro and I'd also have it below YY.

I'd also have Newcastle at 10, and move those above it down 1 slot each.

I'm also facinated that Lakelands continues to make Top 50's while Robina Woods - a far better golf course - misses out. Hell, even Twin Waters shits all over that Lakelands dump. I'd also squeeze Royal QLD into the list, above some of those QLd courses.



#38 _Andrew_

_Andrew_

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2337 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 07:16 PM

QUOTE: AndyA @ Dec 8 2005, 05:57 AM

JJJ, I don't have a problem with the architects rating their own courses, so long as the vested interests are listed in the magazine. 

AndyA,

I don't agree. Bias individual rankings alter the averaged outcome. Many people who read the list would not read a section on the vested interests of the panelists.

There is also no guarentee that an architect would be playing the eligable courses enough to know their current statis. Most people I know in the GCA industry tend to play less golf than they did before they were in the industry.



#39 boonie

boonie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 888 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 08:21 PM

2 really stand out to me on that list:

13th Beach (beach) ahead of Woodlands (MM has these 2 about right)

Club Pelican 11 spots higher than Peninsula South

Those two to me are way off the mark, but it's not a bad list overall really compared to other years. I haven't played most of the NSW and QLD resort courses though.



#40 golfer69

golfer69

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5258 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 08:41 PM

Matty,

How did you assess courses you have either never played or not played on in some time ?




#41 spooky

spooky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:27 PM

QUOTE: AndyA @ Dec 8 2005, 05:57 AM

JJJ, I don't have a problem with the architects rating their own courses, so long as the vested interests are listed in the magazine.  Perhaps they should devote a page at the end of the article to a list of club memberships  as well:

eg. Mollica, Oliver and Perrett - The National; Clayton and Perrett - Metropolitan; Berg - Commonwealth; Langford-Jones - Kingston Heath; Harrison - The Australian.

They should also mention that Ramsay has or had a pecuniary interest in Laguna Whitsundays, and presumably has one at Club Pelican, which would explain its extraordinarily high ranking on his list.

You can understand them rating thier courses highly, but what the four of them did with Barnbougle makes them look very ordinary. Obviously as designers of new courses they don't want Barnbougle to be rated highly as it makes them look bad. I am sure they would not have known their lists would be printed as they should be embarrassed as a group.

The others rated Barnbougle 2-2-2-2-3-6 wheras the four architects rated Barnbougle 7-8-11-13 They could not have made themselves look any more unprofessional if they tried. mad.gif



#42 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1652 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:32 PM

Matt,

You must love Woodlands. I've never seen it so high, but I'm not disputing it. For those of us that don't know you or your history, how did you sneak onto this panel?


Thx

Liz



#43 the_unreal_jeffrey

the_unreal_jeffrey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1928 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:36 PM

Judge,

You should get Ross Perrett to star in one of your porno flicks that gets made in the back blocks of Dandenong. To list 3 of his own courses in his top 10, when no other panelist lists any of them in their top 10, he must have balls the size of grapefruits.



#44 the_unreal_jeffrey

the_unreal_jeffrey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1928 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:39 PM

QUOTE: Elizabeth @ Dec 8 2005, 11:32 AM

Matt,

You must love Woodlands. I've never seen it so high, but I'm not disputing it.  Liz

Clayts has it at 11 so it is not too far out of the ordinary (unless its a conspiracy to pump up the renovation work of Graeme Grant).



#45 spooky

spooky

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:48 PM

Interestingly if you tally the votes of all the panelists they are all pretty much in order apart from a couple of oddities. St Andrews Beach should be in position 15 as Commonwealth has more total votes (and so do the others behind St ab) and The Dunes should not even be in the top 20 as Woodlands, Peninsula, and National Old have more total votes than it. unsure.gif






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users