3 Ottawa Courses in Top 100

["Richard"]

ahaha

[byerxa]

Just looked at the list. I don't take much stock in these lists, but I played Royal Ontario the first year it was open and it trounced Loch March even then. Although, the price does as well! I'm not a Loch March hater (well, I hate the 5+ hr rounds), just think it does not belong in the list. Stonebridge should be on next year with the new club house. Sure, the greens can get cruel, but the guaranteed 4-4.5 hr round on the weekend is worth the price of admission alone.

It's nice to finally see Glen Abbey NOT in the top 10 for once. Although the valley holes are awesome, I found the rest of the course non-descript. I'd rather play Royal Ontario, Whistle Bear, Lion Head, Osprey Valley, etc. when I'm in that area (originally from west of T.O.).

The nice thing about lists like this is they list some hidden gems. I remember playing Northumberland Links in Pugwash, N.S. years ago for something like $15 and came off the course absolutely dumbfounded at how nice it was.

[Colby]

Stonebridge will be private next year, hahahahahaha

["Richard"]

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooo!!!

[jmr73]

Stonebridge will be private next year, hahahahahaha

Here we go again...lol

[powerlefty]

I've played 20 of these courses and have to admit there are some surprises in the rankings. For one, I do not put Banff Springs in the same league as CB Highlands as a golf course or for service. It is a very flat golf course with the exception of 2 holes, and as a result is a bit boring. As well, service is mediocre for a very expensive place and the practice facility is quite marginal. On the other hand the CB Highlands does not have a practice range which probably costs it a few points. I was shocked to see Stanhope rank in the top 100. Sure it's a nice place to play and a bit out of the way, but lacking in amenities the other courses have and really a fairly basic course. As for the Stonebridge vs Loch March debate - I would rank Stonebridge way higher than Loch March, but that's just my opinion.

[Colby]

Here we go again...lol

I just had to say it. It's way too much fun!

[Shivas Irons]

I can't believe the number of Loch March haters out there.

Nobody said they hate Loch March (just the 5+ hour rounds), it just doesn't belong in the top 100.

[davevandyk]

i would venture a guess that Stonebridge didn't make the top 100 for two main reasons. Firstly, they don't have a Clubhouse as of yet. Secondly, and more importantly are their greens!!! These are some of the most poorly designed greens that i have ever played on

[putterking]

I agree with Colby about Furry Creek. One helluva golf course with awesome views. As for Loch March, I can't believe this many people are knocking it. Every time I've played it, it has been in great shape. I certainly rank it much higher than Stonebridge. I've only played Stonebridge twice with mixed reactions. First time, it was in great shape, the second time was terrible. Greens were all over top dressed and in horrible condition and too many blind shots.

IMO

[Beace]

For what it's worth guys, I have spent two summers in Ottawa now and my favourite course is Loch March. I'm not suggesting, nor is the article, that it belongs in the top 100 for course design/layout/difficulty, or other more, intricate details.

I enjoy Loch March because of the excellent service, the very nice playing conditions, its reasonable costs, and its design. I'm not an expert on course architecture, but I really enjoy the design. It calls for accuracy ahead of power. Put all these factors together, and it is my favourite course in the region. I've played Eagle Creek, I've played Stonebridge.

For my budget and playing ability, I prefer Loch March.

[em69]

Loch March??? It's nice, but to make the top 100....I'm surprised.

[left and gone]

not sure if I should start this but here goes.


As a frequent lurker of this forum I have enjoyed reading the many posts. If anyone is interested, I can help people understand the rankings and the process that was used. I was fortunate to be one of the panelists for the Globe and played many course on the list as well as many that did not make the Top 100. Not sure if there would ever be a list that everyone would agree to. Any questions, fire away. Cheers

[jvincent]

Any questions, fire away. Cheers

What was the selection criteria for the panelists?

[EWhelan]

Was Timber Ridge on the list? That is a nice course. It's also special for me because that where I broke 100 for the first time last year.

[LobWedge]

Was Timber Ridge on the list? That is a nice course. It's also special for me because that where I broke 100 for the first time last year.

Timber Ridge is #33.

[left and gone]

Most of the panel was realted to the golf industry in some way or anther, i.e. Pros, GM and owners. The others were weekend warriors, or more accuratly for me, not a lot of skill but more than willing to share an opinion, and wrote a brief note giving reasons why they should be selected. There was an article in the Globe during the winter of 2003 explaining what they are doing and to apply if interested. Note sure how many applied but based on my golf buddies, I expect that there will be a lot of applicants for the next go. I would recommend keeping an eye on the Globe over the next few months and give it a shot. It was a neat experience and one that forced you to look at courses in a different way. Some of the courses that I thought would score highly or were personal favourites, didn't end up that highly rated and the reverse was true as well.

[mpare]

I too was one of the lucky raters. It was a wonderful experience and it certainly did made me look at courses in a different way. While the ratings criteria attempted to inject a degree of objectivity into the process, the fact of the matter is that individuals did the assessments and each had his or her own slant on things. That said, the final results reflected the cummulative opinion of all the ratings that were turned in. All of it was great fun.