Course Ratings are of #1 importance

[Dave242]

I think we all agree that this site is beyond awesome in what it provides. It is so much more than it needs to be……and timg just keeps on adding and adding features to take it to the next level.

Here is what I think are the most important things on this site – the things that if nothing else existed add the most value to the disc golf world:

1) A Course Directory. Timg provided a structure and did most of the work in importing the majority of the courses. Being able to find courses with all sorts of sorts and filters combined with the ability of the site to allow users to keep things up-to-date makes this site head and shoulders better than the next best directory (pdga.com).
2) A Course Locator. The browsing and filtering by maps and by lists is amazing! Being able to find a course that suits plans and preferences and desires is amazing.
3) Course Ratings. The #1 thing in the filtering just mentioned is being able to easily locate the "must plays" and the "must avoids". And just as important, is being able to find the better courses in a given geography. Accurate/meaningful Course Ratings are of key importance!
4) The Maps, Pictures and Links to course resources (lots uploaded by timg, but more uploaded by users) are key to understanding a course before and while visiting. If one had no ratings but only the reviews to slog through (and there are tons in an entire region) to zero in on the courses you wanted most to play, it would take forever plan trips etc.
5) The Reviews then fill in the gaps in understanding and give a rationale of why the ratings are what they are.
6) The Forum is key in that it keeps the key contributors on the site engaged with each other and working towards a common understanding and purpose. It provides a sense of community and belonging that keeps people coming back. And it provides a great resource (and entertainment) for those just reading and/or learning.
7) Other features (Scorebook, Event Calendar, etc) give other people value and a reason to stay engaged.

timg has provided the skeletal structure of the site (and done lots of the initial filling in of data) but the site would be far from complete and far less useful if not for the user-supplied content. And, the #1 thing that is user-supplied is the Course's Ratings.

I am thrilled to see timg's continued thoughts on keeping the ratings as relevant and meaningful as possible (the recent discussion on phasing out the effect of out-of-doubt ratings.....but not deleting associated reviews). And, I am always interested in active interest and discussions on ratings (and vigilante justice as in the case of HBB & ratings rabble rousers like osgololgoby).

 

[DSCJNKY]

I prefer the reviews... but, I agree with everything you said in general. DGCR rocks and TimG is Bad Ass.
DSCJNKY

 

[AdamCaudle]

Yeah the course directory is so useful.

 

[wolito]

I think my favorite thing about the site is the my dashboard feature. I can see all of the courses I reviewed, rate them in all kinds of orders, the wish list and the favorites. It has so many features!

 

[billnchristy]

I wish more people would use the scorecard or link PDGA numbers.

I think peoples scores and ratings would be less internety if you could see them. For example, I know I stink and while I give advice I don't do so in the "OHHH You wanna throw 990 meters like your best bud Bill do ya? Well first you gotta buy a catapult..." variety.

I like to see what kind of "qualification" the person advising me has.

 

[Beable]

I pretty much agree, Dave, which is why I bought a membership. We should support programmers who write innovative, useful tools like this.

I think the forum is great, too. I like the vibe here.

 

[Technohic]

I love the disc organizer. Its a great way to keep track of discs, especially once you have way more than you carry. Even better when you lose a disc and in case you dont remember the exact weight, it would be sitting there for you to look if you want to replace it.

 

[jeverett]

I posted in the previous thread on this topic already, but I definitely think it's a good discussion to have.

I think the first question that needs to be asked is 'What do course ratings really mean?'. Personally, I look at course ratings to prioritize which courses I most want to travel to play. Whistler's Bend, for example, has been sitting as my #1 priority to play since I first saw it listed here.. I'll finally play it next week, and I probably wouldn't have made it a priority if it weren't listed in the top 10 courses here on DGCR.

In general, though, course ratings seem to be a rough measurement of aesthetics, amenities, crowd, maintenance, challenge, and enjoyment. As many players have mentioned, in particular both 'challenge' and 'enjoyment' are pretty subjective. Some players are looking for championship-difficulty courses, while others are looking for open recreational courses where they aren't likely to lose plastic. A course that one player really enjoys another player might find too tight or too random.

I'd really love to see a way of splitting course challenge out from course rating somehow. Course SSA (or more accurately SSA / Length) seems to be a fairly reasonable way to do this, given the availability of that data, although the PDGA site typically includes tons of SSA measurements for courses, so deciding which SSA to use (or averaging) isn't necessarily simple either.

 

[Dave242]

I fully understand that ratings are not many people's favorite things to spend time on making sure they make sense. Like has already been mentioned by a few people, it is much more fun to do things like writing and reading reviews, chatting on the forum for fun or advice, keeping track of scores etc.

The main point of starting this thread is highlighting "the things that if nothing else existed add the most value to the disc golf world"

Part of what motivated me in attempting to start some good discussion and dialog is several comments I have read downplaying the importance of ratings.

Granted, I am a numbers geek, but per the rationale of the OP ratings ARE the most important thing we as contributors need to try our hardest to get right....at least if we want this site be as useful as it can be to the huge and growing DG population.

 

[bcr123psu]

I think Dave242's synopsis of the most important aspects of this site are spot on. Where's the course? How do I get there? What's it like? What do my DG peers think of it? Is it going to be worth my time? Although I waste a ton of time every day on the forums and as awesome as the other DGCR profile features are, those are gravy compared to the value I get from the course-specific information.

Oh, and this:

DGCR rocks and TimG is Bad Ass.

You said it brother :hfive:

 

[Dave242]

I'd really love to see a way of splitting course challenge out from course rating somehow. Course SSA (or more accurately SSA / Length) seems to be a fairly reasonable way to do this, given the availability of that data, although the PDGA site typically includes tons of SSA measurements for courses, so deciding which SSA to use (or averaging) isn't necessarily simple either.

This is a great idea!
If SSA and corresponding Length were added and a computation for Difficulty (or Challenge Factor as Olorin calls it) was made, and this was sortable this would really serve the purposes well for those who seek out challenge above and beyond the things that the general DG-playing public likes (which is what this site is fantastic at collecting and reporting).

Granted, I have had tons of discussion on the topic of Difficulty and everyone seems in agreement that there is no perfect means of calculating something consistently meaningful.......but something would be better than nothing to give a rough (but purely objective) idea of Difficulty.

 

[John Rock]

Would it be easy to split different lay-outs on the same course? Such as difficulty of Blue Tees vs. White Tees?

 

[bazillion]

I'd like to also mention the social groups, which facilitate people getting together and playing DG for real, making friendships, improving the game, and getting a chance to pay timg back by promoting the site locally.

 

[Dave242]

Would it be easy to split different lay-outs on the same course? Such as difficulty of Blue Tees vs. White Tees?

This is the biggest challenge to get meaningful Difficulty ratings: correlating what is reported in PDGA results as SSA to the course Length used in the tournament is very hard......much more so years after the event when no one remembers the exact set up.

So to answer your question (at least in my estimation): yes, it would be very hard to do that on this site in a way that was meaningful and accurate.

This is a key thing I like about user-supplied data: it can be entered by those with first hand knowledge of the event right after the event.

On a related note, I can also see Difficulty wars being started where people go in an edit the SSA and Length data to manipulate things with data that is not accurate. This would be a bummer if it happens.....but I can easily see it happening. Maybe if SSA & Length data changes were logged in the course changes history page that would be enough accountability to discourage this from happening.

 

[DavidSauls]

Personally, I find the reviews one of the most useful features. Beyond telling me whether a course is good or bad, I can get an idea of what style of course it is, how crowded it might be, how peaceful, dangerous, difficult, etc. Far more than I can tell by pictures or a simple rating.

Though honestly, it's the forums I use most.

A sign of how great the site is is that for everyone, there are features we like and features we have no use for. But the latter are very useful to others. There's so much here that you're bound to find something useful to you.

 

[sidewinder22]

I don't mean to sound queer or nothing, but perhaps a two rating system like figure skating would be appropriate with an artistic and technical ratings or something like that.

 

[bazillion]

I don't mean to sound queer or nothing, but perhaps a two rating system like figure skating would be appropriate with an artistic and technical ratings or something like that.

For what? Avatars?

 

[Beable]

This is the biggest challenge to get meaningful Difficulty ratings: correlating what is reported in PDGA results as SSA to the course Length used in the tournament is very hard......much more so years after the event when no one remembers the exact set up.

So to answer your question (at least in my estimation): yes, it would be very hard to do that on this site in a way that was meaningful and accurate.

This is a key thing I like about user-supplied data: it can be entered by those with first hand knowledge of the event right after the event.

On a related note, I can also see Difficulty wars being started where people go in an edit the SSA and Length data to manipulate things with data that is not accurate. This would be a bummer if it happens.....but I can easily see it happening. Maybe if SSA & Length data changes were logged in the course changes history page that would be enough accountability to discourage this from happening.

I don't agree that there's a need for this. If a course is difficult from the long tees and not as difficult from the short tees, then it should have a pretty correct rating across the board from both noobs and veterans. If a course is just plain difficult and doesn't have short tees, then it will (appropriately) have a lower rating because it only caters to one type of player.

 

[Dave242]

I have no problem with you disagreeing........but you are wrong. There is a need for people who want a challenge above all other factors that go into ratings to be able to find those courses (see Opti's thread on "Are Flip & Idlewild wussy courses?"). I would say that the majority of seasoned tournament players (and PDGA members) would find this sort of a function very useful.

But, if timg decides that there is not a need for this, I am wrong since he owns this joint and he would be the one implementing it.

 

[rybassett]

I wish more people would use the scorecard or link PDGA numbers.

I think peoples scores and ratings would be less internety if you could see them. For example, I know I stink and while I give advice I don't do so in the "OHHH You wanna throw 990 meters like your best bud Bill do ya? Well first you gotta buy a catapult..." variety.

I like to see what kind of "qualification" the person advising me has.

love the scorecard feature