Billipo
Birdie Member
Is it lame for course designer to rate a course they designed?
Course Ratings
- Thread starter Billipo
- Start date
No, because eventually their one review wont matter when the masses start reviewing the course and are not biased.
If you stay within the web site rules anyone can do whatever they want. That said, I think it would be a good idea for the course designer to identify themselves as such within the context of the review. Sometimes I sort of wish the designer would do a review and explain some of the thinking that went into the course design especially if the course is on public land. The AHJ over the land may make specific demands on the design thus be a very limiting factor making the design *seem* wonky or stupid. For example, at Lake Township in Bridgman, MI a friend of mine redesigned the course there. Someone commented, "Gee that'd be a great place for a basket" but the problem with that spot was the township was VERY specific about any holes that go anywhere near the park boundaries and definitely did not want any throws going over a park roadway. Also, because of the layout of that course I guarantee we will get reviewer complaints about some of the walks between holes. It just can't be helped at Lake Township because of the other activities there and the way the park is laid out.
Is it lame? Well...just like the reviews themselves it's just a matter of opinion. IMHO a review from the designer could be very insightful if well written.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
I've done a few "reviews" of courses I designed but only put comments in the Other Thoughts section (no Pros or Cons) to explain some things about the course as davrtherocketguy suggested. I set my disc rating close to the current average rating others have given the course. https://www.dgcoursereview.com/revi...x=&exp_played=&exp_reviewed=&v_rating=&page=3
biscoe
* Ace Member *
i haven't done it but i don't see why a rational review from a designer isn't just as valid as anyone else's review- probably moreso. I'm pretty sure i would be harder on my courses than the general populace tends to be. An irrational review from a designer who can't see the forest for the trees on the other hand...
Billipo
Birdie Member
Enjoying the dialog.
I almost always have some sort of constraint from the property owner when putting in a course.
At the end of the day, the course is what it is not what it could have been.
I enjoy rating feedback and sort through what is reasonable or not.
As a designer, if I could post a commentary of the course, not as a rating, but in the description that would be great. Stuff like intended course skill level or goals of course. Not so much what I wanted to do, but does the course meet design intent.
My only gripe with self rating is if intended to help pump up numbers. Believe me it happens.
Full disclosure: I have never posted a rating of any course. Yet I have been asked many times to walk through or provide feedback on other's designs or redesign options - man to man.
I almost always have some sort of constraint from the property owner when putting in a course.
At the end of the day, the course is what it is not what it could have been.
I enjoy rating feedback and sort through what is reasonable or not.
As a designer, if I could post a commentary of the course, not as a rating, but in the description that would be great. Stuff like intended course skill level or goals of course. Not so much what I wanted to do, but does the course meet design intent.
My only gripe with self rating is if intended to help pump up numbers. Believe me it happens.
Full disclosure: I have never posted a rating of any course. Yet I have been asked many times to walk through or provide feedback on other's designs or redesign options - man to man.
I know someone in Vermont you need to talk to.
What's stopping you? Seriously, you can write a review and do like CgkDisc does. In fact, that sort of commentary would be really helpful in understanding the why's of how the holes came to be.
Oh I think all of us know that happens - frequently. I know for a fact of one case.
Eventually though the real rating shines through as more dg'ers hit the course and do their own write-ups. Well if you ever get time you should I think. I would be really interested in seeing what you'd have to say. :thmbup:
I'd say it's not the greatest idea, because it's most likely going to be slightly higher than what the course actually is, and will influence other reviews down the road. Let the reviews come in on their own, and comment on those if you feel the need to chime in.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 2,233
Rules ? There are no rules. Here's a gem of a rule, "Please give an honest rating"...but if you can't, well that's ok.
Yes there are:
A few ground rules:
##Stick to reviewing and commenting on the course and not other reviews/reviewers.
##Please do not actively promote other courses in your review.
##A course review is *not* the place to advertise your business/website.
##Do not give an artificially low/high rating to try to influence the overall rating. Please give an honest rating.
##Refrain from cursing and/or using profanity in your review.
##Do not reference any illegal or drug related activities in your review.
##Only rate a course if you have played a majority of the holes on it.
##Do not review a course unless you have played it recently (ie. within the last 6-12 months)
Just click on "Review Course" for any course you haven't reviewed and those pop up.
Billipo
Birdie Member
Quick summary
I have had an opportunity to install a variety of course styles...
Par 3 style (All levels) - 3.5
Challenges - property shape
Notes- wooded course with all grass fairways.
Complaint- 22 year old baskets ( in good shape) are not latest.
Par 66 (All levels) - 3.47
Challenges - funding
Notes - 3 sets of natural tees gold not installed, with maybe 2 exceptions players do not walk across other skill tees or have same hole experience.
Complaints - gravel tees
Blue level par 3 (blue/gold) - 2.75
Challenges - park shape and avoiding existing activity, park size.
Notes - requires distance,accuracy,nerve most shots.
Complaints - too hard, two long walks, not 18
Red level par 3 - 2.44
Challenges - none
Notes - designed for campground use. Campers paid for it.
Complaints - 9 holes, why not longer
Campus rec course (red/white) - 2.15
Challenges - lack of obstacles, requested start/finish location,
Notes - has all elements course 200 yards away doesn't...complimentary
Complaints - 200 yard walk to nearby course, flat property
Others...
Point is that courses designed with intended audiences get a rating beating. I'd give them all a high rating for intended use. Hey I did my best college try. Park owners sure are pleased on all accounts.
Off point of original post, but someone went there...anyways.
I have had an opportunity to install a variety of course styles...
Par 3 style (All levels) - 3.5
Challenges - property shape
Notes- wooded course with all grass fairways.
Complaint- 22 year old baskets ( in good shape) are not latest.
Par 66 (All levels) - 3.47
Challenges - funding
Notes - 3 sets of natural tees gold not installed, with maybe 2 exceptions players do not walk across other skill tees or have same hole experience.
Complaints - gravel tees
Blue level par 3 (blue/gold) - 2.75
Challenges - park shape and avoiding existing activity, park size.
Notes - requires distance,accuracy,nerve most shots.
Complaints - too hard, two long walks, not 18
Red level par 3 - 2.44
Challenges - none
Notes - designed for campground use. Campers paid for it.
Complaints - 9 holes, why not longer
Campus rec course (red/white) - 2.15
Challenges - lack of obstacles, requested start/finish location,
Notes - has all elements course 200 yards away doesn't...complimentary
Complaints - 200 yard walk to nearby course, flat property
Others...
Point is that courses designed with intended audiences get a rating beating. I'd give them all a high rating for intended use. Hey I did my best college try. Park owners sure are pleased on all accounts.
Off point of original post, but someone went there...anyways.
I reviewed our private course---but that was in the early days of this site, when reviews were few and far between, and I figured any review would help the site. I think mine was the only one.
But of course, I included a disclaimer that I was one of the owners, as did my co-owner when he later reviewed it.
As long as a designer reveals this, then any out-of-line review or rating will be readily apparently when others review it.
Personally, any time I play a course, I'd love to have a little inside information from the designer.
But of course, I included a disclaimer that I was one of the owners, as did my co-owner when he later reviewed it.
As long as a designer reveals this, then any out-of-line review or rating will be readily apparently when others review it.
Personally, any time I play a course, I'd love to have a little inside information from the designer.
greg_b_4
Birdie Member
Ive reviewed my designs but like to think i was very unbiased. I also mention im the designer and i list pros, cons, particular obstacles in the process. within my review i can also uodate with upgrades ive made which are always ongoing. I go hole by hole with explanation. Pretty much a caddy book. Here is the first course i designed and im the first reviewer https://www.dgcoursereview.com/mobile/reviews.php?id=6974&mode=rev
If a designer rates and reviews his own design a bit higher than the average, it shouldn't just be dismissed as pride and boosterism.
Every disc golfer, and every reviewer, has opinions as to what makes a good course---what features highlight it, what flaws are minor, how long or how tight fairways should be.
When a disc golfer has a chance to design a course, it's likely to be to those criteria. Thus, he's designing a course that met his pre-existing idea of what good courses are.
So if you love 350' holes and love courses with lots of them, and if you don't mind long transitions on courses you play, then when you get a chance to design a course you might include lots of 350' holes, and some unusually long transitions. Then you'll think it's a good course, not because you built it, but because you built the sort of course you've always thought was good.
Every disc golfer, and every reviewer, has opinions as to what makes a good course---what features highlight it, what flaws are minor, how long or how tight fairways should be.
When a disc golfer has a chance to design a course, it's likely to be to those criteria. Thus, he's designing a course that met his pre-existing idea of what good courses are.
So if you love 350' holes and love courses with lots of them, and if you don't mind long transitions on courses you play, then when you get a chance to design a course you might include lots of 350' holes, and some unusually long transitions. Then you'll think it's a good course, not because you built it, but because you built the sort of course you've always thought was good.
The title of my review for Shu Pond was "Semi-biased Owner" or something along those lines. I also dropped a review for Wittkopf but, I feel I was pretty accurate with my review. Again, that was in the early days of the site when reviewers were far and few between.
