True or False: Newbies/barneys should not write reviews

[prerube]

if i take people to go play wrightwood, a beast of a course, i tell them to be prepared for serious hiking and MANY tricky shots. its not a beginner course. if my beginner friends want to go, they know what the score is and that bitching will not be tolerated.

as far as safety issues are concerned, im only gonna ding for tee pad conditions and other glaring problems like rusty nails/syringes strewn about the course. im of the mindset that you can get killed walking your doggy and wrightwood (my only 5) is on a ski resort...lots of radical elevation change and places to roll ankles, fall off cliffs, etc. if youre not careful.
good course design and amenities trump beginner-friendliness.

It's a tough call because some of the most beginner friendly courses I know are also some of the worst courses.

For me safety issues are throwing over a crowed picnic area or very busy bike path. Throwing close to busy roads and parking lots is a safety issue I dock for also. Recently I had a car drive 2 feet infront of me while I was preparing for a drive on a tee pad, a foot fault would have sent me to the hospital. Safety Issues like that immediatly hurt the rating. I just wrote a review for Pratt park, an amazing course in Virginia, but 2 poorly designed holes killed the course rating.

 

[Beable]

Seems like this should be a poll.

I have given my opinion on this in the past: everyone should be able to write reviews. I do think it would be nice if you could give a self estimate of your skill level in some kind of automated way. This is already offered on the site by letting you show your PDGA rating, but I have no intention of joining the PDGA any time soon.

That said, I have personally not written reviews because I've only played the handful of courses in my area. I could rank those courses in my mind (and three of them are supposedly very good), but that wouldn't help anybody else. I will write reviews of those courses after I get to some other areas and am able to make comparisons based on that.

 

[fractalzoom]

Everyone should write reviews, regardless of skill level. Putting a rating down is extremely subjective... the most important thing is to be honest and give an accurate description of the course. It's not just about the reviewer, but the person reading the review to get an idea of the course to see if it's for them or not.

Ultimately, the more reviews there are, the better idea one can get of a course before playing it. This site has great value as long as people are honest and can communicate in a review.

The mechanic analogy isn't great. I could imagine a mechanic saying some giant, monster-truck sized engine is the best... but I don't necessarily want to crush cars with it, I may want nice gas mileage on my way to work.

 

[zenbot]

Why don't you just execute all the n00bs and then you won't have this problem? n00bs are out there taking our discs, littering on our courses, signing baskets from their lucky n00b aces, and raising their children on my hard earned dollar!

 

[zenbot]

BTW I voted false. Everybody's opinion is valid.

 

[The Valkyrie Kid]

I think any reasonably intelligent person is capable of writing an objective review regardless of whether they are a noob or not. I would qualify as a noob, yet I would dare say my reviews aren't terrible. I played and reviewed a fairly difficult course (Rogers Lakewood), and got 7 ups to 1 down, because I didn't let my horrible rounds there affect my objective view of the course. Now, granted, I don't have the experience that many others do, and I haven't seen a huge array of courses, but I can still figure out if a course's flow is good or not, comment on the conditions of the tee pads, or notice if every hole favors left handers, for example.

Edit: plus, the edit function is available, so if, after the initial review, you figure out you said some idiot things, you can always go back and IMPROVE YOUR REVIEW!

I have 1119 thumbs up and I think this dude (Jukeshoe) very clearly expresses why you don't need a whole lot of experience to write good reviews, you just need common sense and a certain degree of intelligence.

 

[The Valkyrie Kid]

^Thank you! I am a n00b, I think I write good reviews. I have 180 thumbs up and 4 thumbs down. Not one of those downers let me know WHY they sent me the negative thumbs. Obviously, they were just being weird because 180 other people disagree with them lol.

But seriously, in this regard, I wish Tim would add some kind of function that requires you to fill in a feedback text field before you send a 'no' thumbs. If my review is not helpful, well I would certainly like to know what was sooo unhelpful about it.

Shameless plug: http://www.dgcoursereview.com/profile.php?id=8922#

Nope, I respectfully disagree. If people had to fill in a feedback text field, then many would either skip giving any thumbs or just give up and give it a thumbs up. Then with very few thumbs down, we'd all be fat and happy and be thinking everyone was thrilled with our reviews, be they patheitic or be they well written gems of wisdom of DGCR lore.

I think I have somewhere around 65 thumbs down. Some I flat out don't understand. Some I know I probably upset the locals or the course designers. Some weren't my best work. Some I tried to review a course that I had played too many years ago. If you're not picking up a few thumbs down, then you're sugarcoating your reviews in order to get the thumbers.

If you're getting too many thumbs down, then you probably need to ask yourself the question, Why? I seem to be seeing a few people writing these extraordinarily long reviews. I think you can clearly review any course without giving us War and Peace. Especially when the course has already been reviewed 20 times before.

 

[sloppydisc]

I think my reviews have gotten better, and more complete with time, but that doesn't mean a newbie can't write a good review. I don't have great skills or distance, but I don't punish courses that have long, difficult holes. As long as a reviewer is honest and fair to the course it's all good. I think you could be a terrible golfer, and relatively new and still write a decent review. But experience does help. The newbies will get better the more they play, and the more courses they see. If you don't like them just hit that Trusted Reviewer only button.

 

[chuckdisc]

I think any reasonably intelligent person is capable of writing an objective review regardless of whether they are a noob or not. I would qualify as a noob, yet I would dare say my reviews aren't terrible. I played and reviewed a fairly difficult course (Rogers Lakewood), and got 7 ups to 1 down, because I didn't let my horrible rounds there affect my objective view of the course. Now, granted, I don't have the experience that many others do, and I haven't seen a huge array of courses, but I can still figure out if a course's flow is good or not, comment on the conditions of the tee pads, or notice if every hole favors left handers, for example.

Edit: plus, the edit function is available, so if, after the initial review, you figure out you said some idiot things, you can always go back and IMPROVE YOUR REVIEW!

I have 1119 thumbs up and I think this dude (Jukeshoe) very clearly expresses why you don't need a whole lot of experience to write good reviews, you just need common sense and a certain degree of intelligence.

I agree with both of you...

I think a persons reveiws will get better the more they play & write. Go back and read your owen reviews after you play course a couple more times. So you can fix if you have to.

 

[dreadlock86]

Jesus does bring up a legitimate point, but at what criteria do you draw the line where an inexperienced reviewer ends and an experienced one starts? And with a good chunk of DGCR'ers falling into the inexperienced category, are we biting our own hands? To me, bad reviews are better than none.


Problem is that knocks out good reviews from people who haven't acquired 100 green thumbs yet, and leaves in not so good ones from people who have.

I keep telling you guys, TR status isn't all you some of you are cracking it up to be. If you've review a few very popular courses, getting 10, 15 even 20 votes towards your 100 off of a single review needed isn't all that hard to do, even with the revised standards.

fair enough but it is still an optional filter that at the very least will drop the crap reviews. there are way more bad reviews from non-TRs than bad reviews from TRs. you might miss some good non-TR reviews but at least you won't get the trash.


bottom line is that there is no serious issue here and a little common sense goes a long way, for reviewers and readers.

 

[jesus]

Maybe people should add in their score from the last time they played the course. When people tell me about how great concerts were, I always ask them what drugs they were on. Drugs make a difference, for sure.

 

[Jukeshoe]

Maybe people should add in their score from the last time they played the course. When people tell me about how great concerts were, I always ask them what drugs they were on. Drugs make a difference, for sure.

Drugs probably skew some of the course reviews as well. Do you want a checklist for reviewers? I played and reviewed this course under the influence of the following substances...?

What if Valk Kid said he played and reviewed all the courses that he has while under the influence of crack? Would that instantly invalidate the quality of his reviews?

Also, I don't think you need to shoot well in order to review well. Again, you just need to remain objective and use some common sense.

 

[jesus]

Drugs probably skew some of the course reviews as well. Do you want a checklist for reviewers? I played and reviewed this course under the influence of the following substances...?

What if Valk Kid said he played and reviewed all the courses that he has while under the influence of crack? Would that instantly invalidate the quality of his reviews?

Also, I don't think you need to shoot well in order to review well. Again, you just need to remain objective and use some common sense.

I don't think it is a matter of intelligence and I am not trying to question the intentions of any newer players that write reviews. However, without a good understanding of what the top pro's can do on a course, it's hard to be objective.

 

[jesus]

And yes, I think peope should have to take drug tests if they want to write reviews.

 

[mashnut]

I don't think it is a matter of intelligence and I am not trying to question the intentions of any newer players that write reviews. However, without a good understanding of what the top pro's can do on a course, it's hard to be objective.

I still very much disagree with this point of view. First of all, I want to see all kinds of reviews. I love to read the opinions of great players, poor players, and everyone in between. If you just want to know what top pros think of courses, you're not going to get all that many reviews because most of the top pros aren't going to come here and write a bunch of reviews.

Second of all, who says reviews have to be (or even are supposed to be) objective? Reviews are about opinions, hopefully supported by facts about the course, but every review is going to come from the point of view of the person writing it. If you think you're writing objectively you're kidding yourself. I make it clear why I have the opinions I do about courses, but they are still my opinions that others are free to disagree with.

 

[Jukeshoe]

I don't think it is a matter of intelligence and I am not trying to question the intentions of any newer players that write reviews. However, without a good understanding of what the top pro's can do on a course, it's hard to be objective.

What the top pros are and are not capable has absolutely nothing to do with rating a course, in my opinion. I stick with what is there on the course, and don't worry at all about how the top pros play. Hell, my guess is that 99% of the people who use this site aren't top pros.

So why should I be skewing my reviews to reflect how top pros might play a course?:|

 

[Jukeshoe]

And yes, I think peope should have to take drug tests if they want to write reviews.

I sure hope that is meant tongue in cheek....

Edit: nothing like violating people's privacy for the sake of disc golf course reviews...

 

[jesus]

What the top pros are and are not capable has absolutely nothing to do with rating a course, in my opinion.

Really? I think it has everything to do with course design. But hey, if you aren't concerned with the legitimacy of certain holes, thats your business.

 

[jesus]

I sure hope that is meant tongue in cheek....

Edit: nothing like violating people's privacy for the sake of disc golf course reviews...

Narcotics skew perception and to speak from such a vantage point violates my better sensibilities.

 

[Danger]

Second of all, who says reviews have to be (or even are supposed to be) objective?

Actually, Tim outlines that on the page that comes up when you write a review. There is even a thread about it:
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1770