Trusted reviewers apparently like my home course better than I do, as it goes up 3/8ths of a disc. I guess familiarity really does breed contempt. So much for HBB.
-
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)
A couple of thoughts on 5 star reviews
- Thread starter Greg Layton
- Start date
NatiBuckeye
Eagle Member
I dont believe that is possible. A certain course could have several players local to it who are TR's.
I also dont think it is unfair to say a course is only 5 dics if you would change nothing about it. Its 5 disc because it is best of the best, I dont believe there will ever be a course that someone who is reviewing it would not want to change anything about it at some point or another.
Nothings perfect.
Courses don't have to be perfect to get a five. Few things are truly perfect and cannot be changed. Think of the prettiest supermodel, the fastest car, the best university... We give top ratings to things that are less than perfect all the time, because they are the best of the best.
I think the problem is that 5.0 is a number -- and people don't want to give a "perfect" score to anything that is less than perfect. That's why I think letter grades might be more helpful in some cases. We are used to letters being ranges of numbers. I think an A+ rating should apply to the top 2% of all courses -- whatever they're rating. The best of the best are the top 2% -- or right now the the top 54 courses in the nation (approx 2700 courses in the US).
For me, I guess I just see the 5.0 as being like an A+ -- for me it defines a range that is the best of the best; a 5.0 doesn't mean "perfect." This is really a discussion over whether or not our current scale is strictly quantitative or if there is a qualitative element that allows each number to connote a range of values. Does that make sense?
I think the problem is that 5.0 is a number -- and people don't want to give a "perfect" score to anything that is less than perfect. That's why I think letter grades might be more helpful in some cases. We are used to letters being ranges of numbers. I think an A+ rating should apply to the top 2% of all courses -- whatever they're rating. The best of the best are the top 2% -- or right now the the top 54 courses in the nation (approx 2700 courses in the US).
For me, I guess I just see the 5.0 as being like an A+ -- for me it defines a range that is the best of the best; a 5.0 doesn't mean "perfect." This is really a discussion over whether or not our current scale is strictly quantitative or if there is a qualitative element that allows each number to connote a range of values. Does that make sense?
Similar threads
