Poorly Reviewed Courses

[Sunday Mike]

Can't speak for the rest of ya, but when I look at a new days reviews, I ALWAYS go for the reviews which are two stars or less. Anyone else do that?

Guess I want to know what people find to be a bad course. I personally have never played a bad course. I've only played courses which I liked better than others. Anytime I get to play, no matter where is a win/win for me!!

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

Huh??

I play any and all courses, I don't hardly pay attention to the rating unless I have limited time in an area, then I will hit the higher rated courses.

 

[jkdisc]

i just reviewed a course and rated it 2.5 because it just wasnt anything special, they cant all be great.

 

[Ace D]

it is tough on a 5 point scale to put some courses down to 1 or 2 stars just because they're not as good relatively speaking. i have seen courses that deserve a lower rating, to the point where its not as fun to play. things like uneven dirt teepads, litter, and careless or uninspired course design all take away from my playing experience.

 

[Dave242]

it is tough on a 5 point scale to put some courses down to 1 or 2 stars just because they're not as good relatively speaking.

Think of it this way to make it easier: An average run-o-the-mill course is a 2.5. A course that is a little worse than that is a 1.5-2.0 and a course worse than that is a 0.5-1.0.

Now, the problem is that when you are starting and have only played 10-20 courses, your perception of what is average is skewed by what you have seen. If you live in an area like NC where the courses are good-great and there are few poor courses you will be skewed high (if you only play those courses). Conversely, if you live in Chicago, the courses are mostly bad with a few good (but not great) in the area.

I have lived in both areas and see this perspectives issue caused by "what is average?" This is why I like the ratings/reviews from those who have played a bunch of courses across a bunch of states.

 

[afroflow]

I've played some bad courses. One in particular has everything overgrown, the tee's are complete mud most of the time, and it's a 9 hole course with picnicking in the middle of what short fairways it has. oh, did i mention theres a $5 day fee to play there?

most courses have a distinguishable quality to them that given most draw backs will still have some decent elements. however there are horrible never should of been made, and left to forgotten memory courses.

 

[bboykin]

Hear, hear!

 

[Sunday Mike]

Huh??

I play any and all courses, I don't hardly pay attention to the rating unless I have limited time in an area, then I will hit the higher rated courses.

I guess what I meant is that I enjoy reading the reviews of poorly rated courses...so I always read them first. I guess it's the train wreck effect.... whats more compelling--people saying nice things and gushing, or venom and vitriol?


Now if I was traveling to an area I would investigate ALL courses and then plan out according to where exactly I would be in an area, regardless of reviews

 

[prerube]

First off, you have played a poor course, Mesquite Grove, AZ.

I have courses from 0-4.5 in my ratings.
0= no tees, no signs, no upkeep, missing baskets/no baskets
1 = poor flow, a bunch of short redundent shots, poor baskets and upkeep
2 = Passable. These are courses that are all around weak, but not disgusting.
3 = Solid course, some flaws nothing special
4 = Awesome course!
5 = Perfection, greatest course for all skill levels, from my 7 year old cousin to Ken Climo, it has everything and can not be improved upon.

I have started going the dave242 way and thinking in rubrics, it seems to be the only way to stay fair and impartial. Olorin and Gottafixit have checklists of every aspect that can make a course great.

 

[Sunday Mike]

First off, you have played a poor course, Mesquite Grove, AZ.

OK. I enjoy Mesquite Grove. Is it great? No. Can it be improved on? Yes.
But it's a hell of a lot better than not playing disc golf at all.

 

[phishbrained]

Reviews are definitely relative. I have rated courses high, then once playing Flip City, realized I was too generous with other courses, but they were the best I had played up to that point.

 

[prerube]

I think you need to play a good base of courses. I do not take people who have only reviewed one course seriously, especially if it is the only course they played.

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

Should be required to have played 100 courses before being allowed to review.

 

[Dave242]

Guess I want to know what people find to be a bad course. I personally have never played a bad course. I've only played courses which I liked better than others. Anytime I get to play, no matter where is a win/win for me!!

OK. I enjoy Mesquite Grove. Is it great? No. Can it be improved on? Yes.
But it's a hell of a lot better than not playing disc golf at all.

Have you ever visited a course that you feel no need to ever go back to? Where setting up a practice basket in a field and throwing it would provide more fun than returning to that course?

If not, I envy you and the area you live in. I try to play every single course in an area if I have time (if just passing through I try to hit up the best ones). I have played a lot of those types of courses and I do not hesitate for a second to give them a rating of 0.0-1.5.

These are the courses I deem to be "bad" courses. (But it is a subjective thing......like music or movies. A "bad" movie for me might be quite enjoyable to another person).

 

[prerube]

Should be required to have played 100 courses before being allowed to review.

I don't know about that, most people have not played 50. I think you get a good sense of what to expect around 2 dozen as long as you have played some horrible and some of the best.

 

[Dahlemj24]

Poor Course

The only reason I would rate a course low would be based on design and a couple of other variables.

For example:
There is a course in Rockton, IL called the Woodlands and the fairways are very over grown, the designer clearly didn't understand flight patterns of discs, the longest home is maybe 250', and the tee pads are like 3X2ft so you can only play when it's dry out. This course I would rate really low for those problems.

Another Example:
The 9 hole course in Beloit, WI. I enjoy playing here in the early morning when there aren't families picnicking in the middle of the fairways. I also would rate it low because when it gets around dusk there is a lot of sketchy activity that happens in that neighborhood and the bullet holes in the bathroom doors are a prime example of that. It isn't the course that I'm rating badly, it is the location and atmosphere in which you have to play in.

 

[Sunday Mike]

Have you ever visited a course that you feel no need to ever go back to? Where setting up a practice basket in a field and throwing it would provide more fun than returning to that course?

I've never played a course like that. Every course I've played I have wanted to play again. There is (was) a course in East BFE in the Phoenix area that was never official it was 9 baskets in a field next to a new housing area. I don't even think the place had a name I have no idea if it is still in existence. but I played it and had fun. Have I been back? No, but that's only because it's about an hour+ from my house in a direction that I have no reason to go. It is obviously not a destination, but if there was another course in the area I would play it again. I wouldn't make a trip to play there, but if I happened to be out that way I sure as hell would bring my discs.
I like to play. Wherever, whenever I can.

 

[Sunday Mike]

The only reason I would rate a course low would be based on design and a couple of other variables.

For example:
There is a course in Rockton, IL called the Woodlands and the fairways are very over grown, the designer clearly didn't understand flight patterns of discs, the longest home is maybe 250', and the tee pads are like 3X2ft so you can only play when it's dry out. This course I would rate really low for those problems.

Another Example:
The 9 hole course in Beloit, WI. I enjoy playing here in the early morning when there aren't families picnicking in the middle of the fairways. I also would rate it low because when it gets around dusk there is a lot of sketchy activity that happens in that neighborhood and the bullet holes in the bathroom doors are a prime example of that. It isn't the course that I'm rating badly, it is the location and atmosphere in which you have to play in.

Very sensible.
I admit the only times I really don't enjoy playing are in course which are overly crowded. I don't like waiting around.

 

[Dave242]

Should be required to have played 100 courses before being allowed to review.

Maybe what you are getting at is that "Trusted Reviewer" levels should be based on 1) number of courses played, 2) how many states/countries played and 3) the number of reviews written (and liked by the audience).

Now it is based on how good a writer you are (not how honest or accurate you are) and whether or not you manage or fail to get lots of thumbs up (based on who knows what from the anonymous world of the internetz).

 

[Dave242]

I admit the only times I really don't enjoy playing are in course which are overly crowded. I don't like waiting around.

Would you rate the course poorly for that? Does not seem sensible to me as quite possibly the very reason it is crowded is that it is a good course.

Sounds to me Mike, like you would be an easy grader if you were a teacher. "I love all my kids and God loves them all too and I want them to like themselves and their parents to like me. I cannot find it in my heart to give them anything but A's. OK there might be times I can give out a B+, and I will apologize to their parents for doing so."

Obviously I am being facetious , but not rating properly on a curve is doing no one here a service in trying to find the best courses and avoid the worst. Average courses should get a 2.5.....and theoretically 2.0-3.0 discs should be the most common rating you dole out.