Just because you don't live close it's not a Con

[ERicJ]

Similar to ptsawyer's thread I've been noticing a recent trend in some of the reviews that people are listing the course not being close to them as a Con. Some are tongue in cheek, but others seem serious. A few examples:

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#2302
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5091
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5403

I'm sorry, but your choice of where to live is not a Con of the course.

ERic

[heelboycraig]

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Similar to ptsawyer's thread I've been noticing a recent trend in some of the reviews that people are listing the course not being close to them as a Con. Some are tongue in cheek, but others seem serious. A few examples:

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#2302
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5091
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5403

I'm sorry, but your choice of where to live is not a Con of the course.

ERic

Those are three bad examples you listed if you're trying to show distance as being a real negative. All three reviews you listed rated the courses high, which shows they enjoyed playing them. Maybe if someone really rates a course lower because of distance, it's a valid point; otherwise, just like those 3 reviews, it's clearly intended as a compliment.

[taxman]

i can see what Eric is getting at. i've noticed the "i'm not close enough comments" but i don't really think it's a big deal. the reader of the review should be smart enough to figure that one out for themselves.

however if someone were to actually mark down a course for not being close enough then i would say that's not right.

[garublador]

As long as it's not reflected in the score for the course it doesn't matter.

[Mando]

I'm glad this was brought up. I actually found myself downgrading a course from a personal benefit/cost standpoint, which shouldn't have entered the equation, and revised my review.

[Adam Schneider]

There's two factors with location:

(1) How far it is from your house

(2) How far it is from anything else in the world

#1 shouldn't affect a rating, but #2 could. If the only way to get to a course is a 2-hour drive up a winding gravel road, and there are no other courses anywhere nearby, that's a legitimate "Con." Maybe it shouldn't affect the 1- through 5-star rating, but there's no harm in mentioning it in the text. After all, proximity to a number of other good courses certainly could go in the "Pros."

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by Adam Schneider

There's two factors with location:

(1) How far it is from your house

(2) How far it is from anything else in the world

#1 shouldn't affect a rating, but #2 could. If the only way to get to a course is a 2-hour drive up a winding gravel road, and there are no other courses anywhere nearby, that's a legitimate "Con." Maybe it shouldn't affect the 1- through 5-star rating, but there's no harm in mentioning it in the text. After all, proximity to a number of other good courses certainly could go in the "Pros."

Totally agree.

ERic

[sidewinding]

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Similar to ptsawyer's thread I've been noticing a recent trend in some of the reviews that people are listing the course not being close to them as a Con. Some are tongue in cheek, but others seem serious. A few examples:

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#2302
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5091
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/review...&mode=rev#5403

I'm sorry, but your choice of where to live is not a Con of the course.

ERic

In all three of these examples the reviewers are obviously not being serious. They are making a point that these courses are so good that they are jealous that they don't live closer to the course. They are sarcastically using the "con" section to give the course another "pro". I don't have a problem with it. Sometimes a course is good enough that it's hard to give it a con so people get creative because they feel obligated to put something in the con section.

An actual con would be something like "it's not worth the 30 minute drive from Austin to play this course" which I think is a valid con.

[magictenor1]

How far you live from a course should have no bearing on your review. It would appere that most of the things we are seeing are not actually changing the score given however. If a course is good enough people will drive to play it.

[The Valkyrie Kid]

I'm agreeing with most everyone before me. All three of these reviewers were giving the course a back-handed compliment saying they wished the course was closer to their homes. All three gave those courses high scores.