True or False: Newbies/barneys should not write reviews

[jesus]

I've read plenty of reviews with bad information from fledgling disc golfers. For example, I've read bad reviews about 350 foot holes, that happened to have water covering the first two hundred feet, just because of the water. I've read complaints about having to walk uphill or holes that were just too long :wahhhh.

In my opinion, it's pretty simple. If you aren't that good of a player, if you find a course too difficult, if you don't like having to throw a long tunnel shot, get better. When you get better, you'll find you have more options on the course, which makes some holes seem more valid and others seem less valid. A hole is not bad just because you are unable to execute the shot. A hole is bad when you don't a genuine shot to execute. Think long and hard before you give a bad review. Is the course bad or is your game bad? A lot of people seem to confuse the two.

Would you want to read a review of a car from a guy who has no knowledge of engines? I wouldn't. I want to hear from people who understand, fully, the subject at hand.

 

[Roc1Time]

Agreed

 

[mashnut]

What if you were a newbie, just like the person who wrote the review? Then it might be really helpful, and give you a review of the course that will match your own perspective. Yeah, those reviews aren't the ones I read for information about the course, but the beauty of this site is that you can get all kinds of different perspectives on a course and put them together to figure out if it's somewhere you want to play.

 

[jesus]

What if you were a newbie, just like the person who wrote the review? Then it might be really helpful, and give you a review of the course that will match your own perspective. Yeah, those reviews aren't the ones I read for information about the course, but the beauty of this site is that you can get all kinds of different perspectives on a course and put them together to figure out if it's somewhere you want to play.

That's a solid point. That said, it seems as though the easiest solution would be to let people know if it is beginner friendly or not. Any information, outside of that, should be left to the more experienced players. Again, this is just my opinion. I would never want to read a review of a ball golf course from a beginner, for any reason.

 

[Roc1Time]

I think all reviews for the most part are good but I also dont agree with a course getting a low mark because it was hard or because the player has only played for a short time and its not their home course. It works the other way too because I see reviews of "ok" courses get a 4.5 or 5 by guys who have 10 courses under their belt

 

[DSmith]

Idlewild is hard

I'm giving it 1 star.

 

[Cyclops]

"fledgling disc golfers"

Sounds fair, lets say a "fledgling disc golfer" is what? Anyone who hasn't played at least 10 years. Laughing.......yeah sure.....how about, 5? Then you can be promoted by invitation to be a reviewer. I'm just making a point. Where do you draw the line?

How many would give false info and say they have been playing for 5 years? What if you had to play a course 5 times before you could review it, and not all in one day. Posting all your games and dates in your dashboard. It's not an easy determination and I think Tim had a understanding of what he wanted when he started this site.

Bottom line if I read a lame review, I just move on to the next one.

 

[mashnut]

All this kind of stuff is why there's a way to vote helpful/not helpful on a review, and then sort the reviews on a course by most helpful. If a review on a course is way off base, it'll get a lot of negative votes, and fall to the bottom of the list when you sort that way, and you don't even have to look at it. I really do think everyone is entitled to share their opinion on the courses, and I think it's a better site because of that.

 

[Jay Dub]

I've read plenty of reviews with bad information from fledgling disc golfers. For example, I've read bad reviews about 350 foot holes, that happened to have water covering the first two hundred feet, just because of the water. I've read complaints about having to walk uphill or holes that were just too long :wahhhh.

In my opinion, it's pretty simple. If you aren't that good of a player, if you find a course too difficult, if you don't like having to throw a long tunnel shot, get better. When you get better, you'll find you have more options on the course, which makes some holes seem more valid and others seem less valid. A hole is not bad just because you are unable to execute the shot. A hole is bad when you don't a genuine shot to execute. Think long and hard before you give a bad review. Is the course bad or is your game bad? A lot of people seem to confuse the two.

Would you want to read a review of a car from a guy who has no knowledge of engines? I wouldn't. I want to hear from people who understand, fully, the subject at hand.

I would want to hear what a beginner thinks of the car they drove for the first time, so would the engineers who designed the car. I wouldn't consider that review to be the catch all, but some of the information from the beginner is important.

Same goes for beginner disc golfers. Unless you think all course should be long, difficult championship courses. If that's the case how do we get beginners to play and therefore the sport to grow?

 

[jesus]

Same goes for beginner disc golfers. Unless you think all course should be long, difficult championship courses. If that's the case how do we get beginners to play and therefore the sport to grow?

Actually, this is a good discussion. I would prefer all of the courses to be long, championship courses, but I would also prefer to get paid a billion dollars every week at work, doesn't mean it's going to happen.

Ball golf courses are made for good golfers. PAR is established by pro performance. When a beginner plays golf, they typically shoot 140 or 150, because it is extremely difficult. I've never been to a golf course that was designed with beginners in mind, ever. Maybe they are out there, I just haven't seen them.

 

[mashnut]

Ball golf courses are made for good golfers. PAR is established by pro performance. When a beginner plays golf, they typically shoot 140 or 150, because it is extremely difficult. I've never been to a golf course that was designed with beginners in mind, ever. Maybe they are out there, I just haven't seen them.

Except for the thousands of executive or par 3 courses out there designed for a quick round on your lunch break, or for bringing people out who aren't all that good. I think that's an important part of growing the sport, having courses for lower level players to learn on where they can feel successful and want to stick with it until they're better and ready for the tough courses. Frankly, I'd rather there be courses for the TDDs to hang out on, and leave the championship courses to the serious players, it makes it more fun for everyone.

 

[jesus]

Except for the thousands of executive or par 3 courses out there designed for a quick round on your lunch break, or for bringing people out who aren't all that good. I think that's an important part of growing the sport, having courses for lower level players to learn on where they can feel successful and want to stick with it until they're better and ready for the tough courses. Frankly, I'd rather there be courses for the TDDs to hang out on, and leave the championship courses to the serious players, it makes it more fun for everyone.

Par 3's aren't for beginners. They are for golfers in a hurry and poor people.

 

[mashnut]

Par 3's aren't for beginners. They are for golfers in a hurry and poor people.

I bet you'd hear a different answer from serious golfers and course pros. Better players don't want a bunch of beginners slowing down their course and making them wait while they dink and dunk their way down the fairway. Course pros probably love seeing new people come out to play their par 3 courses, it means more people who are going to come buy stuff from you in the future, without having to listen to complaints from the serious golfers about slow play on the real course.

 

[jesus]

I bet you'd hear a different answer from serious golfers and course pros. Better players don't want a bunch of beginners slowing down their course and making them wait while they dink and dunk their way down the fairway. Course pros probably love seeing new people come out to play their par 3 courses, it means more people who are going to come buy stuff from you in the future, without having to listen to complaints from the serious golfers about slow play on the real course.

Think of this from a business stand point. Why would you create something for a demographic that does not exist? Par 3's were created to meet a demand. The demand was from golfers who want to play, but don't have 4 or 5 hours to commit to it.

I understand exactly what you are saying and I agree with you. I think we just disagree about the intentions of the people who put them in.

Our sport is growing naturally. The first time I ever played disc golf, I played on a very, very difficult course. It didn't phase me. The type of people that need it to be easy are the type of people that aren't going to be in it for the long haul anyway.

 

[mashnut]

The type of people that need it to be easy are the type of people that aren't going to be in it for the long haul anyway.

And? Those people still create demand for new courses by filling up the existing ones. Those casuals who are only going to play a couple times a year still buy discs. There's nothing wrong with building a base of players from a wide range of skill level and involvement in the sport, and if throwing in some easier courses to get those people interested and playing helps build that base then I'm for it.

 

[JMONEY]

I like mashnuts idea where the more negative votes means the review fall towards the bottom of the list.

 

[billnchristy]

All you people that hate beginners...if you had your way when you started playing disc golf the DG brown shirts would have hauled you off too...then where would we be?

 

[jesus]

And? Those people still create demand for new courses by filling up the existing ones. Those casuals who are only going to play a couple times a year still buy discs. There's nothing wrong with building a base of players from a wide range of skill level and involvement in the sport, and if throwing in some easier courses to get those people interested and playing helps build that base then I'm for it.

Are courses designed for "those casuals"? I sure hope not. It would be a terrible waste of what limited resources we have.

 

[Disc Dog]

It all comes back to the same issue. The do not get better at either writing reviews or playing without practice. So they write reviews and play.

It is our job to either help these people or get out of the way. All that has to be done is use some common sense:doh: when reading reviews. Check to see how long they have played, how many reviews written, and whether they are a trusted reviewer or not.

We were all noobs at one time. If someone stomped on your toes when you began would you still be playing. For most us the answer is "no".:wall:

The best any of us can do is "pay it forward". Someone at one time or anther helped us. Do the same in return.:clap:

 

[MWallbrown]

OK guys, do your own homework!! Never beileive what you hear unless you check for yourself. look at the courses pictures and other reviews and judge for yourself. Once again, do your homework, dont just believe everything your hearing. Then once you play it get on here and back em up or shoot em down yourself!!