A secondary window should come up when someone tries to give their first 5.0.
To be fair, a 2.5 is described as decent/typical on the drop-down, not average. 3.0 is described as "Good". I tend to use 3.0 as a default for "competently designed using space that's available with no glaring flaws/problems/neglect".
I think my personal ratings go something like this:
0-1: Garbage course that is incomplete, dangerous, or abandoned. Should probably be pulled and have its equipment recycled (maybe, if it's not garbage itself) into a new course unless it's a couple of local gals and guys trying to will a course into existence.
1.5: Course offers little more than baskets to throw at and practice. Serious design flaws and flow issues. Maybe play it to bag a course or it's within walking distance from your place.
2.0: Course provides an actual round of disc golf to play, but it's very basic. Holes are repetitive and boring. Good course for locals to throw into rotation for variety and practice but never something I'd take a visiting guest to. Better than nothing. Many missing quality of life items, if any, such as tees, signs, bathrooms, etc. Maintenance likely spotty and the course is likely neglected.
2.5: Course provides an actual round of disc golf to play and has a small handful of memorable or challenging holes. Is likely a course in transition, either a good course that's starting to fall into disrepair and decline or a new course that's building itself up and adding items as funding and volunteer time become available. Course is likely geared towards beginners but may have some unfortunately challenging holes that feel out of place.
3.0: Course is fun with no glaring issues. It's not perfect and some items like tees or pads may be missing, but it has some of those features. Course is made up of a combination of decent land and clever design. Roughly half of the holes are at least interesting. To me, this is an average course that likely has a small group of people looking after it in addition to a city maintenance crew. Likely the level that will begin to see league play. Course is great for a beginner but likely not much of a challenge for an intermediate-advanced player.
3.5: Course is fun and has that little bit of something that makes it special. Most holes are interesting with no more than 2 or 3 "fillers" that were likely included due to flow. Good enough to attract a league and not a bad choice for a tournament. Several quality of life features present like bathrooms and benches, as well as course structures like pads and tees. Problems may still be present, but they are more than balanced by the good points of the course. If you're in the area, you should make a point to play the course.
4.0: All holes have *something* interesting or challenging. Course is on attractive land and the holes have excellent design. League support is significant and major features you'd expect are present. May not be perfect, but you can tell that problems are temporary and likely to be fixed in short order. The course is worth driving a solid hour to try out or worth a road-trip stop on a disc golf trip.
4.5: Like 4.0, but nearly perfect. Absolutely minimal flaws if any. Excellent design. unique land that is well suited to disc golf. This is a course that is loved and nurtured and cared for. It's not a park, it's a disc golf course from its core. It's a course you plan a trip to the city in order to play it and should be on every serious disc golfer's bucket list.
5.0: I'm going to stay with "nearly perfect" because life tends towards entropy and there's not a darn thing you're going to do if you show up on a rainy day. This is a course that's so good it gives you something you didn't even realize you wanted or needed when you play. It's not a game, it's an experience. I think it's not a score that will be standardized for everybody. I think it's a score a course achieves when everything aligns and you just leave with a different perspective.
These aren't hard and fast. Being really strong in one area can shore up something that's missing in another. Seasons can really come into play - a muddy mess in spring may be a glorious splash of fiery color in the fall. A fair bit of score just comes from how a course makes me feel during and after playing it. I think a 4.5 vs a 5.0 will tend to flip-flop for a lot of people because of taste. Probably true for most of the .5 increments. I also think my view has evolved as I have played more and more courses. Frankly I'm strongly tempted to go back and re-review some of my earliest courses based on the perspective on "typical" having shifted from playing an additional 20+ new courses, but I think I'd need to replay them first to give them a fair shake. I imagine if I traveled and played as much as somebody like Valkyrie or some of the others that have dozens of courses under their belt that view would be even more realigned and nuanced.
