All the major golf magazines do it. It is done on this site. And most golfers rank the best courses they have played, though likely not in a list as large or complex as one of the magazines. But how do we define how different these courses are? How can you really say that one course is better than another when the numbers from some ultra-complex formula, submitted by numerous people, most of whom have likely not played both courses in question, only separate the courses by a tiny fraction?
Truth is, though the magazines would never admit this, you can not. As an example, in the current Golf Digest list, Los Angeles Country Club (North Course) ranks #47, Eagle Point Golf Club ranks #48; this writer has played the latter and not the former. The ranking score for LACC is 62.85, the score for EPGC is 63.83. Going only by the Digest methodology and not getting deep into personal preferences and such, is there really a difference between those two courses? The best answer is "not really." Of course you can go into the statistical break down of the individual categories and see that LACC is supposedly better in some areas while EPGC is better in others, but that basically only serves the purpose of justifying some bias as to why one SHOULD better than the other (something this writer is guilty of).
The same goes for the ranking seen on this site, either the Top 25 or the overall ranking. What really makes Tobacco Road (#14) better than Ross Bridge (#15)? That is all subjective. And so are the magazine lists. Because regardless of how many criteria they put in place or how many averages, the lists are still nothing more than an average of a given number of objective opinions.
Ross Bridge is an especially good example of potential bias, right here where you are reading. The course just flatly fit this writers eye. It was extremely long while not being boring. It had the best turf conditions seen thus far in Alabama. Even being ultra long, it had good variety. Those are all things that this writer likes to see on courses. And the ranking reflects that. This course fit many of the things that are good in golf courses in the South, where the majority of the courses profiled here are located.
But the bias does not extend to local area courses. How many raters go to Bandon Dunes having never played a links course elsewhere and skew the ranking they give the course, either positively or negatively. Same goes for any number of other courses that are supposedly the best in a given area. How often do people who live in that given area rate said course higher simply because it is the best in the area?
In the end rankings are fun to read and even fun to make on your own. But keep in mind that they are all either a single person's opinion or a compilation of opinions. They are certainly not factual data sets (though it is a fact that Eagle Point ranks #48 in the 2011 Golf Digest ranking), these lists are merely opinions. Take them as such and have fun.
No comments:
Post a Comment