View Single Post
  #5  
Old 09-25-2013, 05:44 PM
Anthony Pioppi Anthony Pioppi is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Somewhere, Connecticut
Posts: 1
The problem can be that if the expectations are Top 100, a courses rank is not only dependent on what is done to it, especially with Classic Era courses, but also the state of other courses. A superintendent can be doing everything in his power to have his layout at it's very best and five other courses that for years were neglected undergo a "sympathetic restoration." Those five enter the rankings or move past the superintendent's layout and now the owners and/or members point a finger at him. They surely are not going to blame the golf pro.

The other scenario is a modern course is designed by a famous architect who's work is not valued by raters. It either doesn't make the lists or doesn't garner a ranking the owner and/or members want. They are not going toto lay blame on the architect. Hell, they paid a lot of money for him. Again, it will be the superintendent who comes under fire.

Nearly 100 percent of the time rankings cause superintendents more headaches than not.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.03767 seconds with 7 queries