How To Review Private Courses

[DavidSauls]

How is Merrill Gray up in Winnsboro?

I was there for the first workday, and haven't made it back since. We were clearing a great higher-par finishing hole when I was there.

It's a great property, with elevation and a pond that gave me pond-envy, both pine woods and old hardwood forest, and some utility right-of-ways for rip-it shots. Bradley's sharp, so I expect him to build a great, high-level course. I know there are enough holes in for them to play some after workdays, but I don't know where it stands.

 

[Monocacy]

Not sure private courses should be rated.

Are we using the same definition of "private"?

In the DGCR top courses list, 8 of the top 10 and 14 of the top 25 are listed as "private".

Are you saying that Caliber, Flip City, Maple Hill, Bucksnort, Highbridge, etc. should not be rated?

 

[Rastnav]

Are we using the same definition of "private"?

In the DGCR top courses list, 8 of the top 10 and 14 of the top 25 are listed as "private".

Are you saying that Caliber, Flip City, Maple Hill, Bucksnort, Highbridge, etc. should not be rated?

I'm guessing he means "not open to the public". Courses that can only be played if you have some personal connection to the owner, or at least have their non-public contact information.

 

[Monocacy]

I'm guessing he means "not open to the public". Courses that can only be played if you have some personal connection to the owner, or at least have their non-public contact information.

That would make more sense, thanks!

But I think the more relevant question there is whether the owner wants their private, restricted access course to be listed on a public site like DGCR.

If the owner does not want their backyard course listed, I respect that choice. But if the course is listed on a site like DGCR, ratings should be fair game. Imo, etc.

 

[Rastnav]

That would make more sense, thanks!

But I think the more relevant question there is whether the owner wants their private, restricted access course to be listed on a public site like DGCR.

If the owner does not want their backyard course listed, I respect that choice. But if the course is listed on a site like DGCR, ratings should be fair game. Imo, etc.

Yeah, IDK, I feel like uDisc has changed the landscape on the "should non-accessible courses be listed". I've seen quite a few courses listed on uDisc that have clear indications that they aren't open to most people.

I think they are likely listed for a couple of reasons. One is just "I built a course in my backyard and now I'm going to put it in uDisc! Wooohooo!" Even if you are just going to play it with friends, it probably feels cool to have it listed "officially", so to speak. Plus you can then record rounds.

The second is that, if you don't list it, some other idiot will and uDisc won't let you take it down. So better to have control no clearly indicate that, no, it's not open to the public.

 

[DavidSauls]

I'd caution anyone listing their unavailable-to-public course, that once information gets on the internet, it's really hard to quash. Other sites scrape the info, and it's whack-a-mole get rid of it all. Better to never list it anywhere.

And, take my word for it, a label that it's not available, won't stop people from showing up.

But it may also be that someone lists them to use the scorecard/scorekeeping system in Udisc.

 

[magictenor1]

Interesting debate. I believe all courses should be rated no differently if they are private. Ratings are subjective anyway and I put way more stock in the content of a review than I do the number given. Another interesting point was about whether courses should be listed here. There is obviously a difference between a private course essentially in somebody's back yard and one open to the public. I know of 2 courses in my area that are not listed here because the public is not welcome. In both cases it's because other people who arenot into DG also live on the properties and don't feel comfortable having strangers on their property. Their right certainly. I wish there was a way to list a course so that I could record it as played and record my score but make it where it was not accessible by everyone

 

[ru4por]

Interesting debate. I believe all courses should be rated no differently if they are private. Ratings are subjective anyway and I put way more stock in the content of a review than I do the number given. Another interesting point was about whether courses should be listed here. There is obviously a difference between a private course essentially in somebody's back yard and one open to the public. I know of 2 courses in my area that are not listed here because the public is not welcome. In both cases it's because other people who arenot into DG also live on the properties and don't feel comfortable having strangers on their property. Their right certainly. I wish there was a way to list a course so that I could record it as played and record my score but make it where it was not accessible by everyone

Review > Rating

 

[wolfhaley]

Review > Rating

For course baggers, or at least myself, they both matter. Reviews are still opinions. Ratings are still opinions. They work best together. The system is fine as is.

 

[ru4por]

The same could be said for public courses, too. Don't rate, just review.

But ratings aren't done for the sake of the course; they're done for the sake of players who might play it.

Players aren't going to read all the reviews of all courses in an area -- they're going to sort by ratings, then perhaps read some of the reviews to refine their decisions. So let's not make it any harder for them -- nor make DGCR less useful.

If someone were coming to my area and asking what courses to play, I wouldn't say, "This public course is great, this public course is boring, and this private course I won't tell you whether it's great or boring, but I'll describe it to you."

For course baggers, or at least myself, they both matter. Reviews are still opinions. Ratings are still opinions. They work best together. The system is fine as is.

Yup, agreed. I generally work it out as David details above. But, outside of an initial filtering, the decision really comes down to the reviews, for me. Certainly not advocating change, just the belief, that the description of the course becomes more important, to me, than where a particular golfer, places the course in their catalog.

 

[Mando]

What changes to your reviewing style do you make when reviewing private (think built in a backyard) courses? Especially when you know the owner and the amount of work they put into it.

I don't know about other states, but the overwhelming majority of backyard private courses in NC are not listed on DGCR. I would estimate that there over 100 such courses are unlisted as opposed to 50 or so that are listed.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I don't know about other states, but the overwhelming majority of backyard private courses in NC are not listed on DGCR. I would estimate that there over 100 such courses are unlisted as opposed to 50 or so that are listed.

But to get back to the OP's question...

Assuming they are listed, should they be reviewed differently than any other course?

If so, how and in what ways?

 

[wellsbranch250]

What changes to your reviewing style do you make when reviewing private (think built in a backyard) courses? Especially when you know the owner and the amount of work they put into it.

I haven't played too many backyard courses. Less than 10 I think, although I guess that number depends on what definition is used to qualify it as a backyard course. I don't recall changing my review style on them. I agree with many of the points noted by aclay, Bogey, Craig, David, nothinbuttree, etc. Of the few backyard courses that I have played, where they often lack in amenities such as the tees, signage and basket quality, they often make up for with their extraordinary eclectic nature, which is something that a public or even semi-private course can rarely offer.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

One more thing specific to limited access, backyard courses: I'm not too concerned about potential safety issues on those courses because they exist in a pretty well-insulated environment. You don't have to be concerned with pedestrian traffic, kids' play areas, etc.

Chances are there aren't even that many DG'ers on the course at the same time, so tees that are dangerously close to baskets just don't cause problems like they would on courses that are open to the public. Even criss-crossing fairways are OK, traffic permitting.

The extremely limited access nature of such courses, allows designers much greater freedom in that regard (as well as others), allowing them to more or less throw caution to the winds.

Along those lines, the only thing the really need to be mindful is the liklihood of discs leaving their property, because neighbors didn't necessarily sign up for that.

Just as players must respect the right of course owners as to listing courses, who can play, and when...

Course owners/designers must respect the rights of their neighbors to not be part of our game.

 

[Mando]

When I order a meal in a restaurant, my rating/satisfaction is based on the quality of the food and is not influenced by any struggles or limitations in the kitchen, etc. Why something is a "con" doesn't make it not a con. The course rating should be based on what is, and is not, there. The reasons should not affect the rating."

A backyard private course is the equivalent of being invited over for dinner at someone's house and not expecting a 5 star meal from the kitchen.

 

[Cgkdisc]

A backyard private course is the equivalent of being invited over for dinner at someone's house and not expecting a 5 star meal from the kitchen.

...and you don't critique it publicly.

 

[Mando]

...and you don't critique it publicly.

Exactly.

 

[DavidSauls]

I don't know. If a private course owner lists his course on a site that critiques courses, I think he's acceding to critiques.

If the owner didn't want the course listed but someone else listed it, that's another issue.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I suppose it's all a matter of what the owner wants to achieve.

Listing a course on DGCR gives a course visibility to a much wider audience. Much of that audience is specifically looking for gems to hit in their travels. Listing a course on U-Disc or DG Scene may do pretty much the same thing. But it also opens the course up to scrutiny and critique on those sites.

For course owners who don't want more traffic, I suppose its an easy choice to not list it. But if you do want to get the word out a wider audience, that sword cuts both ways.

Just my opinion, but I think most reviewers on DGCR (particularly the more prolific reviewers) are more objective than what I've seen on U-Disc or DG Scene, and that the site is more responsible about recognizing the course owner, and respecting their wishes to not have a course listed.

YMMV

 

[Shuie]

Ok, I'll finally chime in!! As a course bagger and course owner, my rubric usually gets tweaked a bit in the fact that usually most private courses have that "atmosphere". You get to play with the owner and hear the stories about the progression of the course, talk design, disc golf and the extra random conversations. With that being said my review of my own private course is one of the lower rated reviews. I should note that the "atmosphere" factor is at most a .5 disc rating.