4.5 stars on a new 9 hole easy course?

[BigAl724]

We have a few Really Really good 9 holers in the Pittsburgh area, with one more on the way.

I've given Linbrook a 4.5 rating and Two Mile Run a 4. Both are awesome courses and the only 9 hole courses that I've rated that high. In fact, I think my next highest rating any other 9 holer is a 2.5. It may be a reach for some people giving Linbrook a 4.5, but I think each hole is absolutely phenomenal. Such a technically challenging course and very, very underrated.

Btw, where's this new Pittsburgh course going to be?

 

[jjtwinnova]

We have a few Really Really good 9 holers in the Pittsburgh area, with one more on the way.

One more? Where?

 

[HeavyCritters]

IMO, it is impossible for a 9 hole course to have the variety and great golf needed to pull a 5.0. Or even a 4.5.

I've played what's currently the #4 9 holer, and gave it a 3.5. For a 9 holer to even get a 4, it better have three concrete tees, and multiple permanent baskets. Hell, I've only give one 18 hole course a 5.0. People hand out 5's way too easily.

I would give WARP a 4.0.

It's a super fun, technical 9 holer with two pads and two baskets on every hole.

#2016

 

[Tripper]

Yeah not much you can do about it. People overinflate local courses. It works the other way also. Somebody gave Deer Lakes here in the Pittsburgh area a 2.0 once. Just have to "sniff" out the bad reviews as previously mentioned.

I had the pleasure of playing Deer Lakes when I was in PA a few years back and thought it was awesome. I recall it was in the top 10 rated courses at the time. I noticed some time later it was down to 17 or something and wondered what happened. Now I know the course is still fine just some tool that lost a disc had to give it a negative review. Sucks.

 

[BigAl724]

It's actually only gotten better over the years too. Same with Moraine.

 

[ohtobediscing]

I think quality of play should take the most precedence in reviews. I'll compare two different 9s to illustrate:

Mill Park is a new 9 near Salt Lake. The signage is beautiful and incredibly durable, tees are from the sidewalk or are cement, baskets Mach X, grass that you could enjoy barefoot, seating and trashcans available everywhere. But the throwing is tepid and repetitive, and the safety hazards are legion. If reviewing it, I'd probably rate it a 2.
Meanwhile, Takena Landing in Albany OR is a 9 with no signs, benches or trashcans, tees are carpet, its never mowed(tho the woods have been tamed enough not to lose discs), and it uses old Discatchers with 8-10 inner chains. But the obstacles, elevation and complexity of throwing are excellent, and it greatly resembles the much-liked Bryant Park across the river. I'd rate it at least a 3.

For the reviews I have written, I've got 9s rated to 3.5, and no 18 higher than 4.5, so I think 9s/18s compare well in relative terms. I can't say I'd never rate a 9er as a 5, but it would have to be beyond compare to top my highest-rated 18.

 

[jjtwinnova]

People hand out 5's way too easily.

I am guilty of handing out a few 5s more than I should, but it's not my fault. With the best courses over a 4.5, if I were to give the best course I have ever played a 4.5, I would be depriving it of its spot in the top ten. However, I want to review it to express my opinions on the design and show my approval.

 

[Cam2]

Fascinating

This discussion is fascinating. I usually use DGCR for reading reviews and checking the stats on courses in my area. I don't submit reviews primarily because I haven't played that many different courses to know how to determine how the course features factor into the ratings. So when I see others opinions on how to rate courses based on several factors, it is a great read. I'm sure there are other threads like this, but I don't often browse the forums either.

To the discussion at hand, my initial reaction was just because the number of holes is less than 18, that should not necessarily detract from its rating. But as I have read through the responses, I am beginning to understand why someone would rate it lower for lack of variety compared to an 18-hole course.

It is hard for me to make a definitive opinion on it given my lack of experience with different courses, but the responses so far have been really educational for someone like me.

 

[KniceZ]

I just did a review of what I thought used to be a great 9 Hole course. They expanded it to 18 by changing a few holes, adding 4 short fillers and 4 wide open bombs. Honestly I think the overall enjoyment dropped a little. 18 isn't always better than 9.

 

[DavidSauls]

This discussion is fascinating. I usually use DGCR for reading reviews and checking the stats on courses in my area. I don't submit reviews primarily because I haven't played that many different courses to know how to determine how the course features factor into the ratings. So when I see others opinions on how to rate courses based on several factors, it is a great read. I'm sure there are other threads like this, but I don't often browse the forums either.

To the discussion at hand, my initial reaction was just because the number of holes is less than 18, that should not necessarily detract from its rating. But as I have read through the responses, I am beginning to understand why someone would rate it lower for lack of variety compared to an 18-hole course.

It is hard for me to make a definitive opinion on it given my lack of experience with different courses, but the responses so far have been really educational for someone like me.

Know that there is no one "right" way. The beauty of this site is that people weigh different factors and amenities differently, and after a while they average out pretty well.

If one person's methodology is far out of line with the majority, it's fine.....but it'll provoke discussions like this one.

My personal thoughts are that my starting point is, how much would I want to play a give course. If there is a 3.5 course 15 minutes away from me, I imagine the course I'm reviewing as if it were 15 minutes away, in the other direction. Would I play it more, or less? How much more or less? (I temper that a little with how I think other disc golfers, of varying skills, would find the two courses.)

That's just me. You might do it differently.

But all other factors being equal, I'm playing the 18-holer more than the 9-holer, and rating it accordingly.

 

[DavidSauls]

I just did a review of what I thought used to be a great 9 Hole course. They expanded it to 18 by changing a few holes, adding 4 short fillers and 4 wide open bombs. Honestly I think the overall enjoyment dropped a little. 18 isn't always better than 9.

Fair enough. I keep using the example of imagining an 18-hole course being cut down to 9. I can think of a couple of 18-holers, where the front-9 or back-9 is bad enough that I'd like to just play the other 9, and be done. But only a few.

 

[JC AceHole]

For reference, the highest rated 9 hole course in the world on this site is a 3.87. I believe a course has to have 20 reviews written before it can qualify for that category. I wouldn't be too concerned about a couple good reviews that may not be deserving. As others have said, it has a way of evening out over time.

 

[EricW]

As a reader request, if you are grading on a different scale, please add that as a comment in your review. It makes it easier to compare vs your other scores. I often look at a reviewer's average score or how they've rated other courses I've played to get some reference.

Recently saw a score that seemed low until I read this comment that the diamond reviewer has max 3 rating for short courses, understandable and fair. Helpful and pretty clear where the reviewer is coming from.

Other Thoughts: I honestly feel bad about giving this course the lowest rating to date. Believe me, I'm really a fan but I can't justify giving a 9 hole course where the longest hole is only 215' higher than a 3 rating.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

Something similar happened to me last weekend, but not due to reviews. A new course in Marshall, MI was posted on this website with no other information than "18/18" holes. I figured it was worth a trek and I was already halfway there at work when I finished my shift. It was still 40 minutes total of driving there and back to where I was, and I discovered that, no, there weren't 18 holes. There were SIX that were done, and to boot they were all 100-footers.

I left a "bad/unplayable" course condition update so nobody else would waste their time and gas like I did.

 

[davetherocketguy]

So the 2 new reviews on a new course in remsen ia are both 4 and 4.5 for a small 9 hole. Based on the reviews alone i know there is no way this deserves this high of a rating. How do we fix it or teach people reviews like this will drive people who go out of their way to play new quality places, absolutely crazy. Just curious im sure this happens often just not often on the stuff in this half of the state i guess. Thanks

I look at that situation and think, "What of it?" Who is anyone of us here to say that they truly did not feel that course is worth a 4 or 4.5? Most likely the reviewers have little experience or little exposure to a variety of courses. It's only natural that we are going to disagree with reviews. My thought is we don't "fix" anything. Let them express their opinion and move on. They'll probably get the hint anyways with all the "Not Helpful" votes they are likely to get.

 

[corin_brown]

I look at that situation and think, "What of it?" Who is anyone of us here to say that they truly did not feel that course is worth a 4 or 4.5? Most likely the reviewers have little experience or little exposure to a variety of courses. It's only natural that we are going to disagree with reviews. My thought is we don't "fix" anything. Let them express their opinion and move on. They'll probably get the hint anyways with all the "Not Helpful" votes they are likely to get.

Exactly correct.

Unless one wants all reviewers to be trained, licensed and qualified to legally pass judgment on the quality of a DISC GOLF COURSE by the Council On All Things Disc Golf or some other regulatory body, I suggest one digs deep and learns how to live with the current system.

 

[corin_brown]

Based on the reviews alone i know there is no way this deserves this high of a rating. How do we fix it

Lol. How do you know a rating is incorrect if you haven't played a course, let alone seen it in person?

"How do we fix it?" You should go to the course, play it and submit your own review and rating.

 

[djcadence]

We had a new 9 hole course added in my area which had the same thing happen, someone gave it a 5 star rating because it has a dog park nearby?? The rating has since dropped, and is now more fairly rated after more reviews have been added over time.

 

[sillybizz]

When are we all going to learn that (a) reviews are subjective (b) the rating of a course doesn't change your enjoyment of playing said course (c) a course can have any number of holes (7,9,11,13,15,16,17, etc.)

 

[swatso]

Signal View, right?

I just did a review of what I thought used to be a great 9 Hole course. They expanded it to 18 by changing a few holes, adding 4 short fillers and 4 wide open bombs. Honestly I think the overall enjoyment dropped a little. 18 isn't always better than 9.

It was my top-rated Niner at 4.0.

As 18, it is a bit-above-average 3.0 in my book.
None of the new holes are as good as the original holes.
They are either short with odd turns, or open, flattish chucks.

I used to make a point to play it if travelling on I81 in the area.
Now, it holds no more draw to me than the other courses in the vicinity.