- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,855
That hole is over 400' idk where you get the 242 from
There's been some hole re-numbering. The hole currently numbered 4 is 242 ft, the hole in the picture is 444.
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)
That hole is over 400' idk where you get the 242 from
Excerpt from another quality 5 disc review of BRP: "Played it near the end of winter while wearing shoes! Feet didn't get wet once!" hahaha. My reviews are terrible too, but that one is funny. If you put BRP next to most of the other top courses, it just (in my opinion!) doesn't hold up. We all know the rating system isn't perfect, but it gives users a ballpark idea of what to expect. Personally, I don't want the best course near me to be high on the list, then it will be too busy to get in a quick round.
ya gotta screenshot the fake ones so we can all point and laugh even after they've been removed :thmbup:
There's been some hole re-numbering. The hole currently numbered 4 is 242 ft, the hole in the picture is 444.
I liked BRP and VQ, but if I was back in the TC's, I'd play Lakewood and Bryant Lake again before either of them. Heck, I'd probably play Kaposia before them, as well.
Played Vision Quest this weekend. Sweet course but damn the guy at the proshop told me to post a review here about 5 times in the 10 combined minutes I was talking to him before and after the round.
I think the reviewer is just putting quotes around it. I doubt it is done in an attempt to diminish the term or the holes since it is in the Pro section.Quote: Many "signature holes".
is the reviewer implying that they aren't really signature holes? why is this phrase in the pro section?...
And referring back to that screenshot of "heartman" 's review on the previous page ...
Quote: Many "signature holes".
is the reviewer implying that they aren't really signature holes? why is this phrase in the pro section?
or maybe he is just quoting someone else who called them signature holes. designers should start putting this info on the hole signs. that way we all know which holes are signature before playing them
It would be nice if the review system required ranking various aspects that make up a quality review to provide a better idea of why the consensus ranking for the course is what it is. It could also be used as another medium by which to sort/filter someone's next outing. For example you could have 5 ratings:
Flow/Navigation
Uniqueness
Upkeep
Replay-ability
Overall
(these are just the first examples that came to my head, could certainly be modified or added to).
This would also help differentiate the glut of 3 to low 4 star courses that seem to make up the overwhelming majority of courses. With out sifting through pros and cons.