• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

Course Ratings when there has been a big maintenance change

jamespenn

Newbie
Silver level trusted reviewer
Joined
Jun 24, 2021
Messages
12
In reading through the reviews on courses, it often comes up that a course starts out really rough, and then over time gets fixed up and is pretty nice. But most of the reviews are from when the course was still very rough.

For example, Lenni Lenape in Lebanon PA is rated at 3.43, but most of those reviews are from years ago when the woods were a nightmare. Today, the woods are mostly cleared out, the corridors widened, the long baskets are maintained and it's a much nicer course than it was 5 years ago or even 2 years ago when I started. But all of those old reviews are still in there where people complain about the impossible rough. I wouldn't have liked it either!

Another example is Shillington Park in Shillington PA, which has no tees and basically just baskets in the woods. The reviews are, correctly, bad, but someday it might have tee pads and be sort of nice. But it'll still have low ratings.

There should be some way to weight the rating to more accurately reflect what the course is like right now.

South Hills in Lebanon PA has always been nice, is rated 4.04 and the reviews from 7-8 years ago are pretty much the same as they are now, although the course has changed some. The wooded areas are now mostly an arboreteum as opposed to corridors of trees. But the layout is still the same. Lenni is just as nice these days, but you wouldn't know it because the ratings are 0.6 apart. Then again, Lenni has a few nothing holes in a field so maybe the rating is still accurate, but you get the point.


The opposite is sometimes true too, a new course opens, it's nice, gets good ratings, but then you go 5 years later and nobody has taken care of the place. The Hershey Hotel is a good example, they didn't take care of the place at all during the pandemic, the entire course was waist high grass. It's better now but for 2 years it was unplayable.

I'm not sure there is a solution though, other than to completely take course maintenance out of the review, and rank courses solely on the intended design features. Then you can look on UDisc to get a live update on the maintenance.
 
Once you get into weighting ratings, you open up a bigger debate as to what is the "correct" weight to give different reviews.

For a given course, a given user can filter reviews to within certain dates, to see a more "current" rating. (It would be nice if you could do that on course searches).

As for descriptions, you just hope to get enough current reviews, that few people read all the way through to the out-of-date ones.
 
It's funny that when I reviewed 2 of the three you mention, I included the signage in the 'Cons'. (IMO, Lenni's diagrams aren't very descriptive, and Shillington's mistake yards for feet). Those would both be outdated if the signage were improved.

I think the best strategy is to read newest first, and take any complaints in the old ones with grains of salt. I find a lot of things have been corrected over the years, and don't apply.

But I take what people write, rather than how they numerically rate a course, much more into consideration.

You write really good reviews (I've upvoted a bunch of them). They'll stand the test of time.
 
I'm not sure there is a solution though, other than to completely take course maintenance out of the review, and rank courses solely on the intended design features. Then you can look on UDisc to get a live update on the maintenance.

Dunno, but if more people would update course conditions we might avoid driving to a course and finding out the grass is waist-high. :doh:
 
I'm not sure there is a solution though, other than to completely take course maintenance out of the review, and rank courses solely on the intended design features. Then you can look on UDisc to get a live update on the maintenance.


the only solution is more reviews. many of us try to only rate based on design but that will never be universal. maintenance is better described in the course condition updates but as monocacy noted, it is sorely underutilized. also, course condition is distinct from general maintenance; one is a snapshot while the other ought to describe patterns over time. that's one of the issues with reviewing while course bagging, the bagger can't speak to maintenance, only current condition.
 

Latest posts

Top