I don't know what Timg is cooking up to deal with drive-by reviewers, but I hope he enacts it soon.
-
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)
flurry of Pendleton King Park reviews
- Thread starter scarpfish
- Start date
LOL, brand new drive-by 5 disc review. It's still clean and friendly.
I wouldn't mind it so much if every review didn't sound pretty much the same, almost "coached".
I laughed at that. The last 2 reviews gave them a 5 with 2 or 3 sentences and both mentioned how clean it was. LOL!:doh:
None of what you're listed would raise it to the level of 4 stars. There would need to be multiple tees and or pin positions, challenging shots such as water, elevation changes or both, and or something significant and unique for a course to be rated at 4 stars. A nice clean basic course that won't challenge anyone but a rec player is a dime a dozen most places, and ranks about 2.5-3 stars.
I had to give similar (2.5 star/3 star) reviews to a couple courses I had sentimental attachment to. It hurts a little, but you have to be honest and objective.
Last edited:
the last two? there are like thirty that use pretty much the same verbiage
sure but, what if it was very friendly? that might be worth an extra 1 r 1.5 stars
oops, another typo. I did mean to say as a "non-drive by reviewer" I stick with my rating of 4 stars. No there was no water hole or multi tees. What made it a 4 for me a 20 year rec- player who has played his share of "good" courses was purely the fun factor. It may be because I have been stuck playing the same Florida courses over and over but I found P.K. to be a notch over the 3 star courses I play every day here in Florida. There was some elevation but mostly flat. What makes a course fun for me is time throwing and not time searching for lost discs. The wooded holes have fairways that are wide enough to shape a shot & not just chuck & luck. The rough that was present did not seem to hide discs to delay the round. The shots in the more open areas let you air it out and there are some long holes.
Yes I will stand by my 4 stars & will return in September to do all the Augusta courses again. Play p.k. & Lake Olmstead (minutes away) the same day for a nice 1 - 2 punch. Lake Olmstead does have more challence, elevation and water holes, yet I like them about the same.
Yes I will stand by my 4 stars & will return in September to do all the Augusta courses again. Play p.k. & Lake Olmstead (minutes away) the same day for a nice 1 - 2 punch. Lake Olmstead does have more challence, elevation and water holes, yet I like them about the same.
If you look at his other reviews though, he tends to skew high. Three stars is his lowest rating.
It might be but for all the courses that you rated a 3.0 (that I've played) I rated them lower than a three
It's not really right or wrong. Your scale skews high. I'm aware that mine is skewed low. I tend to rate about a quarter point lower than average.
I could come into line by bumping the best of my 3.0s to 3.5, the best 3.5s to 4.0, etc, but im not going to do that. a lot of effort to correct what is really a non-problem.
keep doing what you do, but be aware that when you are rating everything at least a 3, sometimes people will find a rating of yours to be high
Don't worry about ratings skewing a half point too high or too low. If the PKers had their way, they'd skew their 5-ratings up to infinity. The course is THAT good. And that clean, I might add.
I can't wait to play this course. From looking at the pictures, it's hard to think of worn-out, dirt fairways as being the makeup of a perfect course. But, maybe I'll be wrong. I've yet to rate a course 5-stars, so maybe this is the one for me.
How can you be skeptical of a course where you can eat right off the grass, and the it will thank you itself? It's that clean and friendly!
I tend to not review a course if I do not enjoy it. May be the reason I have not rated less than 3 for all my reviews. I also tend to avoid courses that based on descriptions and reviews do not appeal to me. I have had some success in that area in that I have enjoyed everthing I have played the last few years and for sure since I started to reivew.
I'm expecting either leprechauns or griffins to be available to serve as my caddie and course guide. And, maybe if I'm lucky, they'll provide unicorns so I won't have to walk.
From the outside, it just seems like such a shame that the locals are promoting an inferior course when they've got 3 great ones at the IDGC and several others that look more appealing than PK.
I did play Hippo the day before PK. We played IDGC the next day. PK was a great for a light day to save some energy for IDGC. However, still quite fun. PK does not have much elevation change but what is also does not have is uneven ground, broken branches, twigs or pot holes to trip you up. I consider PK a light fun play to mix in between the more demanding IDGC, Hippodrome or Lake Olmstead.
I did play PK based on the high reviews and despite going to PK with high expectations, I was not dissapointed. I was also not blown away enough to jump on the 5 star bandwagon.
I did play PK based on the high reviews and despite going to PK with high expectations, I was not dissapointed. I was also not blown away enough to jump on the 5 star bandwagon.
I sense an anti-IDGC sentiment in the PK reviews, especially some of the earlier ones. It's as if those who like PK more---which is fair, just a matter of taste---are going overboard to contrast it with IDGC and the other area courses. I could be wrong, though. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.
By producing an unbiased review it seems one could get their TR status based soley on the tumbups they'ed get from a single PK review lol. The one done in May had what, 56 of 59? Egads. And then some of those what are obviously 5 disc course homer reviews are 0 of 29. Some of those reviews are so bad they make me laugh.
Removing all the drive-bys would bring the course to a 3.23 instead of the 3.73 it's sitting at now. Not much of a difference but the 3.2 seems like a much more realistic rating based on what the course looks like.
Problem is that we can only do that once.Anybody pissed at the 5disc reviews, feel free to :thmbup: my review.
Thanks for keeping it real though. :clap:
If the locals are so friendly, does that mean you don't have to call the number if you find a lost disc? I'd imagine someone that friendly would want the finder to keep a disc for all his hard work.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 2,692
so why isn't a notch over a 3.5 instead of a 4.0?
and more to the point, why can't a course a notch over the other 3.0's one has played/rated still be just a 3.0. with the scale being the way it is, it ought to be obvious that some 3.0 courses will be better than others but not enough to warrant a ratings bump.
kind of like the latest 2 Selah reviews where the guy says he considers them a 4.75 (Creekside) and a 4.5 (Lakeside) but gave them a 4.5 and 4.0 respectively since you can't do quarter points. why wouldn't you rate them what you honestly think and give both a 4.5 with the disclaimer and understanding that you think one of them is better than the other but both are at least 4.5?
Similar threads
