NCG Top 100s England: Everything you need to know about how our list was put together
These are the questions we’re asked most about how we put together our rundown of the top 100 golf courses in England…
Which types of courses have done well?
When you put together a top 100, you have to decide what it is that you are valuing. The courses we value the most are the consistently interesting ones. We like distinctive courses that are full of good holes.
We must be absolutely clear: we review golf courses not golf facilities. That makes a fundamental difference to the list.
How much commercial influence has there been?
None. The list is compiled on merit.
How do you compare a modern parkland to an ancient links?
With some difficulty. But you ask the same questions about things like the quality of the design, the presentation, the variety and the overall memorability to reach a verdict.
How do you compare a humble, rural course with a modern resort complete with a hotel?
Again, it can be tricky. For the purposes of our list, a course begins on the 1st tee and ends on the final green – we are not judging clubhouse facilities, the quality of the catering, the visitor experience or the new short-game area. Which is not to say that these things aren’t important, far from it, just that our area of expertise only extends to the playing experience. It might explain why some high-profile names are a little lower down the list than you would expect.
What if it was raining (or you had the shanks)?
I’d like to think that we can put such things to one side. In fact, I sometimes wonder if I over-compensate in such circumstances. Slow play is the biggest problem for me. Standing on a tee for five minutes can lead me to being overly critical of a hole and course. And that’s not fair – it’s not the course’s fault.
But the short answer is that you have to rise above all these factors to deliver an objective assessment.
Why and how have you weighted the opinions?
In an ideal world, every panellist would have played every course on the shortlist this year. In fact, better still, they would have done the same the year before as well. That, clearly, is an impossibility.
Let’s say that one panellist has played a course once, 20 years ago, whereas another has played it a dozen times, most recently this year. The latter’s opinion is surely more valid than the former’s.
So we have up-weighted the opinions of panellists who a) know a course well and/or b) have played a course recently.
How often do you need to play a course to judge it?
Ideally at least twice. You learn something every time you go back. Opinions based on one-off visits can be unreliable – like prosecution cases that are based on a testimony of a single witness.
Some courses offer instant gratification while others are slow burners.
Play the former type of course several times and you may steadily rate it less highly; with the latter, the opposite is likely to be true.
Can your golfing memory be trusted?
We’re all different but my experience is that if I’ve played a course once and go back 10 years later, what I find is vastly different to what is in my brain. It’s also the case that courses change over the years – sometimes dramatically.
I think there’s a danger that ranking lists can be extensively populated with courses trading on distant memories. That’s why we try so hard to ensure we had up-to-date opinions.
The classic scenario for me is golf course assessors arriving for the opening of a spectacular new course, being treated like royalty, meeting the owner and designer and going away in awe declaring it a nailed-on top 100 course. Only years later does the truth gradually dawn that it’s not quite as special as they insisted.
Were any courses not considered?
We wrote to all our short-listed courses at the start of the season to tell them about our project. For various reasons, the following courses asked not to be considered for this list:
Beaverbrook
Effingham
Queenwood
Wentworth (East, Edinburgh & West)
Whittington Heath
The Wisley
Woburn (Duchess, Duke’s & Marquess)
In each case, we respect their decisions entirely and list them only because you might otherwise have wondered why they were not included.
We will consider them all for future rankings and sincerely hope they choose to be involved. Our rankings strive to include all eligible courses.
More from NCG Top 100 golf courses in England
- RANKING ROW: The courses that should have been higher
Visit the NCG Top 100s homepage for all this and much, much more.
Subscribe to NCG
Dan Murphy
Dan loves links golf, which doesn't mean he is very good at it. He is a four-handicapper at Alwoodley. A qualified journalist and senior editor with 25 years’ experience, he was the long-time editor of NCG. His passion is golf courses and he is the founding editor of NCG Top 100s course rankings. He loves nothing more than discovering and highlighting courses that are worthy of greater recognition.
