How you can tell course ratings are BS on here

[denny ritner]

the whale swimming towards the 5 distribution would happen if ratings were absolute, designers were all learning from each other and courses were continually getting better over time. i certainly hope that's happening

the normal distribution would happen if we're looking at a snapshot of what's out there, assuming that reviewers all had perfect information and were rating relative to the whole.

excellent points have been made that newbies may tend to over-rate as they haven't experienced playing the really great courses and that TR's may be skewed high because their sample reflects their choices to play courses that have received higher ratings.

i also agree about the frustration over writing a complete, concise, insightful review for travelling golfers and having locals give the big thumbs down on the review. overall my rating has held steady at about 2/3 favorable 1/3 unfavorable. i have tweaked some over time and would like to see an 80% favorable rating.

chuck, i tried to find one of your reviews to include you in the sample data that i looked at, but couldn't find one. do you write reviews on this website? if not, why not?

 

[NDABRUSH]

I've seen plenty of TRs who have average ratings closer to 3.5. Now, there's a couple reasons for that. 1. They've played a lot of courses and only reviewed the better ones they've played, or 2. (and more common from what I've seen), they're inflators. If you give most courses you've played 3.5 - 4, especially out-of-town courses, you're going to make the locals happy, which leads to lots of thumbs up.

The downside, as we've seen, is if you're honest with an out-of-town course, and give it a fair/lower grade, the locals will start a :thmbdown: stampede.

Also another group of us. Those that must travel 200-350 miles just to bag a new course. We will be much more picky than those that have 100 plus courses within 100 miles or less in some cases. Plus because of perspective, I need to take 1/2 a disc off of a few of mine.

 

[Dave242]

Because humans are making these courses, are subject to feedback and many have the power to improve them, I would never expect the distribution of all course ratings to produce a bell curve. I would think it would be skewed and shaped more like the profile of a whale swimming toward 5.

Is this the whale you had in mind? Actually, I think if everyone played and reviewed every course in the areas they live and visit, the "whale" might just be swimming towards the 0.

The reason I say this is that it is very easy and cheap for a park to put drop in 9 (or 18) baskets in an unused area and claim they have a DG course (Chicagoland is the epitome of that, but I have seen plenty of this elsewhere too). It is easy, quick and cheap to do that and produce a course that rightly should be rated 0 - 1.5.

Conversely, it almost always takes a ton of planning, good land, and a fair amount of cash to create a course that is a 3.5 - 5.0.

 

[smyith]

Is this the whale you had in mind? Actually, I think if everyone played and reviewed every course in the areas they live and visit, the "whale" might just be swimming towards the 0.

The reason I say this is that it is very easy and cheap for a park to put drop in 9 (or 18) baskets in an unused area and claim they have a DG course (Chicagoland is the epitome of that, but I have seen plenty of this elsewhere too). It is easy, quick and cheap to do that and produce a course that rightly should be rated 0 - 1.5.

Conversely, it almost always takes a ton of planning, good land, and a fair amount of cash to create a course that is a 3.5 - 5.0.

rare that i would agree with...hmmm.

i also think the rating scale is slightly high is because who travels out of their way to play a low rated course? not many people do.

 

[Cgkdisc]

do you write reviews on this website? if not, why not?

If I did them, I would do them on the PDGA site. The five I have done were primarily informational about courses I designed explaining why things that came up in other reviews were done a certain way. I prefer communicating with the course designers directly by email, phone or in person if I have comments that might help their course rather than leave any critical remarks hanging out there in bit space. Much more productive by at least making an attempt to persuade the designer to consider and make changes.

 

[smyith]

I don't think flyboy needs to defend itself. I think the thread is a result of someone being upset that flyboy took over one of the top spots over someone elses favorite course. Then I think there is a side issue that the OP is upset at his number of thumbsdown. If flyboy is a 4.5 or a 5, who cares it is still a great course and should not be belittled so other courses can rise again. Want to know a secret? In 3 months the top 5 will be totally different again.

i think you are still the only one who doesn't get the point of this thread. thats ok tho, maybe you'll figure it out one day if you read before you think.

ok im feeling generous - the point of this thread is pointing out the flaw in the rating/inflating of courses. i could careless about flyboys rank, i just choose it as an example because its the latest course to get inflated like crazy. now its evolved into something entirely different thread. and the only people stuck on the "flyboy bashing" is the ones like yourself who decide what they are going to say before they finish reading/understanding what was written/said.

and by the way, if my favorite course was in the top50 i would be amazed, although i love dretzka park its not the best design out there, but it is one of the most fun courses to go play.

 

[harr0140]

rare that i would agree with...hmmm.

i also think the rating scale is slightly high is because who travels out of their way to play a low rated course? not many people do.

I do I do!

Typically I play the best of the best for my road trips with my wife, but when I am off on my own I play whatever route allows me the most courses. Yes I am a course whore but I love seeing new courses, moreso than playing the same courses over and over. I suspect in a couple years after I have had my fill of the crappy far removed courses I will start to revisit my favorites. Right now its all about playing new courses.

My rating average falls about 2.75 I think and that is a little higher than average per say because I do value all courses. The only way a course will get a 0 or a .5 is if it is almost unplayable, virtually incomplete (and some might argue that should be reserved for the cons or current conditions) but I rate according to what it was like when I was there. You also need to consider that how I write reviews (which is in my DGCR profile) is based upon the liklihood that I would return to that course if all circumstances were the same (meaning if all of the courses I have played were equidistant from my house).

 

[therealbigtrav]

I think the most likely reason is that the courses you are most inclined to play multiple times so your review is worth a crap are not the terrible ones. My average is 2.82 btw.

I'd have to agree with this. I don't think people typically go out of there way to play a course they know to be below average, but will go play a destination course and review it.

 

[prerube]

i think you are still the only one who doesn't get the point of this thread. thats ok tho, maybe you'll figure it out one day if you read before you think.

ok im feeling generous - the point of this thread is pointing out the flaw in the rating/inflating of courses. i could careless about flyboys rank, i just choose it as an example because its the latest course to get inflated like crazy. now its evolved into something entirely different thread. and the only people stuck on the "flyboy bashing" is the ones like yourself who decide what they are going to say before they finish reading/understanding what was written/said.

and by the way, if my favorite course was in the top50 i would be amazed, although i love dretzka park its not the best design out there, but it is one of the most fun courses to go play.

The issue is that flyboy is not inflated, it received it's reviews fairly from a wide variety of reviewers. You are the only one who thinks it is inflated, the other reviews think that it is a fair rating. Unless you think this is all some conspiracy theory.

 

[prerube]

rare that i would agree with...hmmm.

i also think the rating scale is slightly high is because who travels out of their way to play a low rated course? not many people do.

I do all of the time, I even reviewed a 0 rated course.

I just looked at flyboys reviews and I am begining to agree, the last 5 reviews are GARBAGE!

 

[Mando]

- the point of this thread is pointing out the flaw in the rating/inflating of courses. i could careless about flyboys rank, i just choose it as an example because its the latest course to get inflated like crazy.

I don't see the flaw. If a 5 is the best of the best, and there are 3233 courses in the US, the best (top 10%) are the top 323 courses. The "best of the best" would be the top 10 % of those, giving you 32 five star courses.
At the moment there are only 13 courses rated 4.75 and above.

 

[Dave242]

Devil's advocate - who says "the best" is the top 10%? Why not 1%, 5%, 20%, 13.6%?

This is one of several reasons why I like the school grading system for rating courses: It is widely understood (and/or easy to define) that an A+ is a grade of 97-100 (and an A+ = 5.0).

 

[smyith]

Devil's advocate - who says "the best" is the top 10%? Why not 1%, 5%, 20%, 13.6%?

This is one of several reasons why I like the school grading system for rating courses: It is widely understood (and/or easy to define) that an A+ is a grade of 97-100 (and an A+ = 5.0).

dang we must be in the twlight zone, thats what i was going say.

you know really the best of the best come from america and korea. no exceptions.

 

[Mando]

Devil's advocate - who says "the best" is the top 10%? Why not 1%, 5%, 20%, 13.6%?

This is one of several reasons why I like the school grading system for rating courses: It is widely understood (and/or easy to define) that an A+ is a grade of 97-100 (and an A+ = 5.0).

Since the top ten are listed on the homepage, I'm sticking with 10%.
That seems to work for most folks, sorta like "appalachian beauty".

 

[smyith]

I do all of the time, I even reviewed a 0 rated course.

I just looked at flyboys reviews and I am begining to agree, the last 5 reviews are GARBAGE!

i have yet to play a course i would give a 0. some have been close.

alot of those reviews are garbage, and their all 5s.

@ flyboy
stick with the rubber plz!!!! so much easier on the body and way more consistent (when installed properly). i wouldn't go turf, although really nice, when wet they are horribly inconsistent from my experience. rubber is the best!

 

[smyith]

Since the top ten are listed on the homepage, I'm sticking with 10%.
That seems to work for most folks, sorta like "appalachian beauty".

ummm 10 of 3233 courses is not 10%, more like 0.3%

 

[tallpaul]

Unfortunately, some courses simply can't do cement. Rubber was cheered for a while; but, I think if concrete is not an option; the conclusion has been that the artificial turf is better than rubber....especially when wet.

 

[Dave242]

Since the top ten are listed on the homepage, I'm sticking with 10%.
That seems to work for most folks, sorta like "appalachian beauty".

That's the beauty of how things work here......you can stick with whatever you want......or say you are going to stick with it and then do something different (and still be a "trusted" reviewer).

You do make a great point though that the best of the best is indeed a highly select group - 1% by your definition. And......with only 13 of 3233 courses being over 4.75, DGCR is much more discriminating than that!

BTW, I've given an A+/5.0 grade to 9 of 283 courses played = 3%.....exactly in line with my rubric.

 

[smyith]

Unfortunately, some courses simply can't do cement. Rubber was cheered for a while; but, I think if concrete is not an option; the conclusion has been that the artificial turf is better than rubber....especially when wet.

one of our local courses, Black Bear, has fantastically installed turf tee pads. when its wet out there they blow. the only time ive experienced slipping on a rubber pad is when their covered in mud. lay a towel down and plant off that, solves rubbers only flaw...imo.

 

[Mando]

That's the beauty of how things work here......you can stick with whatever you want......or say you are going to stick with it and then do something different (and still be a "trusted" reviewer).

You do make a great point though that the best of the best is indeed a highly select group - 1% by your definition. And......with only 13 of 3233 courses being over 4.75, DGCR is much more discriminating than that!

BTW, I've given an A+/5.0 grade to 9 of 283 courses played = 3%.....exactly in line with my rubric.

I'm impressed. One of you guys can actually do the math.