RENNY REVIEW 2.0?

[BraveThrower43]

I dont think renny's feelings were hurt. I did play there the other day and a chucker in my group was ready to quit after hole 2. It isnt fun for those who can only throw 250' especially since the the only layout currently avalible is the Gold on most holes. I mean if you watch the 09 dubs dvd you can hear Feldburg and Jenk crying about ob and making snide remarks. Its even tough for them to navigate the course safely in Dubs.

Btw Opti secretly thinks we're awesome

 

[Spookyspence]

The basket is in a unfair position on 2 lol Its not a "pro" layout just a "if you miss hahahaha buy a new putter" location. But the course looks awesome, and I would love to play it.

 

[oddjob]

 

[Nuke]

The problem is that he says stuff like "basket position is probably the worst I've ever seen." Not the hardest he's ever seen, the worst. A hard course isn't a bad course, it's a hard course. That's my problem with the review.

 

[New013]

I think a courses difficulty should factor in to your review to a certain extent. If I go play a super easy nine joker in a field I'll take off for that and I'm pretty sure a lot of us do. However to take off that much just because the course isn't set up for your skill level is ridiculous. I went and played pinehursr no. 2 after the us open and it was way out of my skill level, I still recognized the greatness of the course even though I had a terrible score. If I went and gave that course a bad review because of that id be mocked and rightfully so.

Furthermore I'd thumb that review down because it doesn't help me at all, all I get from it is that the course is hard and the baskets are in challenging places. Is that all you want from a review? I don't think we should thumb down reviews just because we disagree with an assessment, but if the review isn't giving an accurate and descriptive assessment then it should be thumbed down.

 

[JeCroisQue]

Giving Renny Gold a 2.0 is ignorant and shows lack of respect for one of the greatest courses in the nation.

Weren't you the guy who sent me a rude pm about my review of a charlotte course. Then, when I responded, you never messaged me back.

My review was good (even though I know you marked it as unhelpful), and so was this guys. Just because someone doesn't give a course a high score doesn't mean it wasn't a good review. I learned much more from his comments then the actual 2/5 score.

PS: The only times people have marked my reviews as unhelpful is when I criticize a course. It's an opinion, get over yourself.

 

[Shipley]

It's a review from a casual golfer, for casual golfers.

I don't think the course needs to have it's rating "defended". It's a well known championship caliber course, that's known for being difficult. A low rating doesn't take anything away from the course.

It's unrealistic for every rating to be a 4 or 5 for this course because of it's difficulty level, especially from casual golfers who experience more frustration than fun, while playing there.

 

[jobwilson]

Currently, the only baskets at Renny are in the Gold Position.

This is to allow the PROS who are playing Renny Gold in the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP to practice the layout before the tournament.

Giving Renny Gold a 2.0 is ignorant and shows lack of respect for one of the greatest courses in the nation.

The rating system on this site needs to be reviewed and this is proof.

It's elitist statements like this that really gives Charlotte disc golfers a poor reputation. The last thing I am sure gfbrad56 was worried about was showing respect to a public park. He didn't like the course. Don't get all butt hurt over one review.

 

[denny ritner]

opti . . . I agree with you in theory . . . but he may be a casual golfer who likes easier courses . . . who are we to say his opinion is any less valid than ours as diamond reviewers?


A review is a review, would venture to guess there are way more avid disc golfers (and course travelers) out there actually reviewing courses . . . so our ratings will far outweigh his. If his reasoning is valid I wouldnt thumb it down if he clearly states why he is rating it the way he did. If he just said it is too hard and doesnt explain it, I would either not vote on the review or thumb it down . . . depending on how I am feeling at that moment.

^^^this

 

[BrotherDave]

I don't like the review or agree with the rating but I'm thumbing him either way b/c there is nothing really factually wrong, just a bunch of his negative opinion. Hard to believe he can't think of any Pros to that course though.

I guess TimG should just add a "Do you like this rating?" feature that would just be a popularity vote and have no bearing on TR status.

 

[optidiscic]

How about this

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63938

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

It's a garbage review in that you know what you're getting into when you play at Renny. It's like going to Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, and then complaining you had to spend more than $20 bucks for a meal. Unless you just happen to stumble upon Renny, you're a fool to bring your family to play the course together.

His issue is that he's used to short, easy courses. His home course, Redeemer Park in WV, is a 3600 foot course. I've sent him a PM to ask if he really thought the course was below average. I really doubt I'll hear back from him.

You can dislike a course and still be objective. I just wrote a review yesterday for Groves Park in Oak Ridge, TN. I didn't like the course at all, but still gave it a 3.0, which was inline with its 3.5 overall rating.

 

[craftsman]

So let me get this straight....
If youre at an average or above average skill level, its okay to apply your skill level to a review and rate easy courses low but its not okay if youre below average to apply your skill level to reviews and rate hard courses low???
I was under the assumption that rating is what you thought of the course, not difficulty level.

Fwiw, two of my favorite courses are local 9'ers that are way more challenging than your average 9'er. They get bashed all the time for difficulty.

 

[_.-Dut-._]

So let me get this straight....
If youre at an average or above average skill level, its okay to apply your skill level to a review and rate easy courses low but its not okay if youre below average to apply your skill level to reviews and rate hard courses low???
.

Basically. This rule is even more in effect if the course is in Charlotte. Arguably best city in the world for DG but that's not enough. If any one doesn't bow down it seems to throw them into a first class **** fit.

 

[Valet]

LOL @ Renny and NC dg. WTF? I mean, seriously? As others have already mentioned, one slight negative review of a NC dg course and the pit bulls come out. Let's move on and let a guy/gal voice their freakin' opinion, even if you don't agree w/ it.

 

[New013]

I don't think the previous two posters realize who started this thread, and I don't think most of you realize that beyond what was said about the difficulty of the course the review was not informative or descriptive.

I'll also point out how laughable it is that some would say that the reviewers opinion should be valid but anyone who voices an opposing opinion should shut up.

 

[JeCroisQue]

I don't think the previous two posters realize who started this thread, and I don't think most of you realize that beyond what was said about the difficulty of the course the review was not informative or descriptive.

Paraphrased points in his review:
- Course well marked, yet not as good as could be.
- different sets of tees and baskets.
- Not a course for relative "newbies" or for families.
- The back nine was not so well marked and seemed only marked for gold tees.
- Might be great for 'pros', but not for someone wanting to toss around or learn how to play, or even in getting someone interested in the game.

It could be better and more detailed. However, it seems like there are some decent points made that would prove helpful to other people who were considering playing the course.

 

[Nuke]

Paraphrased points in his review:
- Course well marked, yet not as good as could be.
- different sets of tees and baskets.
- Not a course for relative "newbies" or for families.
- The back nine was not so well marked and seemed only marked for gold tees.
- Might be great for 'pros', but not for someone wanting to toss around or learn how to play, or even in getting someone interested in the game.

It could be better and more detailed. However, it seems like there are some decent points made that would prove helpful to other people who were considering playing the course.

You forgot the whole worst basket positions possible part. The issue people have is that he says a course is bad because it's hard. There's a lot of valid points to make about the course and even get it a lower rating, but he didn't voice his points very well.

 

[JeCroisQue]

You forgot the whole worst basket positions possible part. The issue people have is that he says a course is bad because it's hard. There's a lot of valid points to make about the course and even get it a lower rating, but he didn't voice his points very well.

I didn't add that because I didn't think those points were made well. He made some good ones and some bad ones. I only added the points of his I felt were valid.

A course isn't bad because it's hard. When someone says that, I know that it's not a good point, so I don't really pay any attention to it. But that doesn't mean he didn't make some helpful points. That's all I'm saying.

 

[BraveThrower43]

Its not a big deal. This 2.0 rating doesnt make renny worse. Its still awesome.