Do you have to play a course to review it?

[thrembo]

I think that most of my reviews are from the "Not playing in the actual fairway" perspective lol. I've only reviewed two courses that I haven't played, lol. The first was an accident. I thought I was reviewing a course I just played but I accidentally put the review onto a course that I hadn't played yet (Why do so many courses in FL have Heritage in their name???) Of course, I quickly played the other course and redid my review. The other more recent time I "reviewed" a course that I couldn't play because it no longer exists and I was trying to save the rest of y'all from making the mile-long walk to where the course used to be from the parking lot.

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by biscoe

More devil's advocacy as I neither write reviews nor do I have any actual problem with the methodology on this site:
What specifically makes playing the course superior to walking it and paying attention as you do so in terms of being able to review it sensibly? Analogies are nice and all but they don't really address the issue in more than a superficial sense. In some ways I think I would write a more well rounded review without worrying about my often crappy shots. You may see a few details on a course while playing that you would not have seen otherwise but imo you are just as likely to miss something semi-important because you are over in the schule not playing the actual fairway. YMMV.

I don't know. I walked Perkerson while injured, but was walking with friends who were playing, and think I have as good an assessment of the course as I would had I been able to throw.

On the other hand, I'd probably walked Winthrop Gold 10 times as a spectator, before getting a chance to play, and playing gave me a better appreciation of it. Perhaps that's because the 1040ish players I'd been watching gave a misleading impression.

[DavidSauls]

I'll footnote that if you walk a course as a tournament spectator, you may not see the exact lines from the tees. That could be a bigger deal on wooded courses and with low ceilings.

[ejvogie]

I think we're all missing the point here. The (theoretical?) person in this scenario was at a course and did not play it. Shameful.

[Surge5]

Originally Posted by glassila

Let's say you go to a course to watch a tournament (pro or otherwise) and end up walking every hole and watching hundreds of throws.
Would it be acceptable for you to submit a review for that course?
.
.
.
I say "Yes", but I am curious what others think.

No. (Which in Spanish is No)

[jenb]

Walking the course as a tournament spectator, or even playing the tournament, is still going to result in a somewhat skewed review. Presumably, you’re seeing the course at its best because the tournament is held at the best time of year and after recent grooming and maintenance efforts. From just one or a few rounds, even experienced course designers can fail to recognize that a course doesn’t drain well and certain tee pads are underwater when it rains, etc. I find reviews by locals who play a course year round to be more helpful when I’m deciding whether to make a trip out.

[elmexdela]

whats the difference in walking it vs walking it and stopping every 250ft

[itsRudy]

Originally Posted by jenb

I find reviews by locals who play a course year round to be more helpful when I’m deciding whether to make a trip out.

Yeah, I feel the same way. I like looking how many times someone played a course and update my reviews often to reflect evolving thoughts on the site.

OTOH, homecourse bias often needs an outsider's view.

Not sure what ideal time of year is though, I like playing late autumn and winter. The colder the better! Nothing nicer than no brush hiding brightly colored circles.

[brentjacobs]

To me, walking a course is nothing like playing a course. The experience is vastly different.

To the OPs question “would it be acceptable” to submit a review of a course if you only walk it - Per DGCR standards, as mentioned a couple times already, it is not.

Originally Posted by wolfhaley

…When reviewing a course on DGCR it asks that you only review a course before a certain amount of time has elapsed since playing it AND that you played at least half the course or something like that. Maybe the majority of the holes, not sure of the wording…

Shocking how many people have never read the standards that wolfhaley mentions. These pop up every time somebody clicks to review a course.

[Steve West]

Originally Posted by elmexdela

whats the difference in walking it vs walking it and stopping every 250ft

I've never walked a course with the idea of reviewing it, but I have walked many courses in the process of (re)designing, as well as when spectating.

When playing, I am focused on finding the one line that will give me the best chance of successfully executing it to get the lowest score.

When designing, I am thinking about the several possible good lines various players might choose, plus the consequences if the disc goes to thousands of other places.

When spectating, I am hardly thinking about the course at all - I am focused on the performances and emotions of the players.