How we rate
Methodology version 1.0.0. Every score on this site comes from the process below, and we would rather show nothing than show a number we cannot defend.
Three separate things, never blended
Most directories collapse every signal into one star rating. We keep three apart, because they answer different questions and mixing them destroys all three.
The nine categories
| Category | Weight | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| Golf course quality | 25% | Design, shot values, variety, conditioning, maintenance, course depth |
| Value | 12% | Experience relative to total cost of membership |
| Clubhouse & service | 10% | Facilities, locker rooms, staff and service consistency |
| Dining | 10% | Quality, variety, consistency, number of venues |
| Family & youth | 8% | Kids programming, pool, camps, family access |
| Fitness & racquet | 8% | Fitness, tennis, pickleball, wellness |
| Social experience | 8% | Events, member programming, community experience |
| Access & availability | 8% | Tee time access, waitlist, guest rules, reservations |
| Practice facilities | 6% | Range, short game, putting, instruction |
| Data confidence adjustment | 5% | A recency and confidence modifier that pulls thin-evidence scores toward the middle, so sparse data cannot manufacture a high number. |
What happens when we lack evidence
A category with no supporting evidence is excluded from the weighting, not scored zero. Scoring it zero would punish a club for our own research gaps, which is the opposite of useful.
We refuse to publish an editorial score at all unless:
- at least 60% of the scoring weight has supporting evidence,
- at least 5 categories are scored, and
- golf course quality — the largest single weight — has evidence behind it.
When those are not met, the club page says “Not enough data to score”. That is a real answer, not a placeholder.
Confidence labels on facts
Separately from scoring, every decision-critical fact carries a confidence label so you know how much weight to put on it.
- Confirmed by club
Taken from the club's own current documentation or confirmed directly by the club. - Reported by members or third-party sources
Reported by a credible recent third-party source or member report. Not confirmed by the club. - Estimated range
A transparent range derived from multiple signals. Treat as an indication, not a quote. - Not publicly available
The club does not publish this, and we have not independently verified it.
Fee and dues figures older than 180 days are flagged internally and queued for re-verification. Stable attributes like an architect credit are re-checked every one to two years.
What clubs can and cannot do
A club can submit factual corrections with evidence, and respond publicly to any review. A club cannot pay to appear, pay to rank higher, or have an accurate negative review removed for being negative.
Rankings
A ranking is published only when it has enough scored clubs, a clearly stated inclusion rule, and original analysis of that market. We do not generate a ranking page for every city simply because the database could produce one.
Past snapshots are preserved. When the methodology changes we publish a new dated snapshot rather than silently rewriting an old ranking.