Bad/Homer Course Reviews

[HyooMac]

New red flag alert. Three 5-star reviews that probably have 200 words among them for Browns n Bows in Browns Valley, CA.

VK has the most recent reviews of all three and it's like night and day comparing them.

Here's what I learned from a full reading of all his reviews:

Prefers courses with nobody around
Wary of playing near gang members or transients
Very enthusiastic about pro shops
Has a bad back

I think that covers it

 

[enragedmullet]

Here's what I learned from a full reading of all his reviews:

Prefers courses with nobody around
Wary of playing near gang members or transients
Very enthusiastic about pro shops
Has a bad back

I think that covers it

That's actually not too far off from me. Likes playing alone or with just a couple others, wary of weirdos, bad back.

 

[markmcc]

I thought that this was an interesting pro: Catch-and-release trout fishing: single, barbless hook w/ approval from Pro Shop. But only if this was (GFSR) Good Fishing Spot Review.

 

[ejvogie]

But only if this was (GFHR) Good Fishin' Hole Review.

FTFY

 

[zendragon]

There is a new course in my area that was opened last year. It's still got a little bit of work to go, but overall, pretty much done. There are two holes that are littered with small trees, leaving, in my opinion, no real line for a good shot through. I did a small write up of my initial experience on the local facebook page, and asked the designer if there was plans to remove one or two of the trees to make it more playable. The short answer was no, they liked the challenge of all the trees. And overwhelmingly, that's been the consensus when I've asked people.

The thing is I've played there quite a bit since then, and the last time I played, on one of the holes, I had, what I thought was the perfect line, sneaking just around one tree on a perfect line to either skip into, or right under the basket, except I hit another tree that was in the perfect position to stop that skip. And this has been every line I can conceive of on this hole, both RHBH, RHFH, or LHBH. There just doesn't seem to be a line for anything other than a very long birdie look.

If I actually wrote this up in a review on here, I feel like I would get blasted for taking off points for those two holes, that several people seem to love. Does that make my opinion invalid, or make it a bad review? Serious question, not rhetorical here. Is it ok to have a dissenter who provides a perspective outside the norm or do you think it's bad because it could dissuade people from playing a course that many others find very enjoyable?

 

[Steve West]

... Is it ok to have a dissenter who provides a perspective outside the norm or do you think it's bad because it could dissuade people from playing a course that many others find very enjoyable?

It's OK if you explain why you don't like it. Add why others might like it, if you can imagine why.

In this case, it sounds like the trees are a crap shoot; but many people like to gamble.

 

[HyooMac]

There is a new course in my area that was opened last year. It's still got a little bit of work to go, but overall, pretty much done. There are two holes that are littered with small trees, leaving, in my opinion, no real line for a good shot through. I did a small write up of my initial experience on the local facebook page, and asked the designer if there was plans to remove one or two of the trees to make it more playable. The short answer was no, they liked the challenge of all the trees. And overwhelmingly, that's been the consensus when I've asked people.

The thing is I've played there quite a bit since then, and the last time I played, on one of the holes, I had, what I thought was the perfect line, sneaking just around one tree on a perfect line to either skip into, or right under the basket, except I hit another tree that was in the perfect position to stop that skip. And this has been every line I can conceive of on this hole, both RHBH, RHFH, or LHBH. There just doesn't seem to be a line for anything other than a very long birdie look.

If I actually wrote this up in a review on here, I feel like I would get blasted for taking off points for those two holes, that several people seem to love. Does that make my opinion invalid, or make it a bad review? Serious question, not rhetorical here. Is it ok to have a dissenter who provides a perspective outside the norm or do you think it's bad because it could dissuade people from playing a course that many others find very enjoyable?

I'm in favor of including anything that's a valid reflection of your playing experience. Others here helped me this year by suggesting some of my "Cons" are actually "Other Thoughts" and I recommend that's the case here. It sounds like the holes have been designed that way on purpose - so it's not really a "flaw" as much as it is a refection of designer's intent...that some people might not enjoy.

You raise a really good point though. I posted one this morning (Scarboro Hills) that was somewhat less positive than others on the site. And it was clear the place has a really active club. So, I'm still waiting to see if I have incurred the wrath of the locals.

 

[davetherocketguy]

I'm in favor of including anything that's a valid reflection of your playing experience. Others here helped me this year by suggesting some of my "Cons" are actually "Other Thoughts" and I recommend that's the case here. It sounds like the holes have been designed that way on purpose - so it's not really a "flaw" as much as it is a refection of designer's intent...that some people might not enjoy.

You raise a really good point though. I posted one this morning (Scarboro Hills) that was somewhat less positive than others on the site. And it was clear the place has a really active club. So, I'm still waiting to see if I have incurred the wrath of the locals.

I wear the wrath of the locals as a badge of honor. I have several reviews where that obviously happened and I don't care because I said what I thought needed to be said.

 

[Monocacy]

If I actually wrote this up in a review on here, I feel like I would get blasted for taking off points for those two holes, that several people seem to love. Does that make my opinion invalid, or make it a bad review? Serious question, not rhetorical here. Is it ok to have a dissenter who provides a perspective outside the norm or do you think it's bad because it could dissuade people from playing a course that many others find very enjoyable?

You explained your views, and those of others, eloquently. That's all I ask for when I am trying to figure out where to play.

You may still get blasted, of course. :doh:

I posted one this morning (Scarboro Hills) that was somewhat less positive than others on the site. And it was clear the place has a really active club. So, I'm still waiting to see if I have incurred the wrath of the locals.

Your review did not match my recollection of Scarboro Hills, but I have not played there since 2013. Since that was so long ago we may have played rather different courses, or we may just value different things. Or both.

What I recall from playing Scarboro Hills was: 1) several challenging and fun wooded holes that I can still picture vividly 9 years later; and 2) several filler holes on the front 9 that did not add much to my enjoyment of the course.

I'm not a local but I had no issue with your review.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

You explained your views, and those of others, eloquently. That's all I ask for when I am trying to figure out where to play.

You may still get blasted, of course. :doh:

^ This is all I ask.
Have a take, and support it.

I'd argue that dissenting points of view are among the most important, because we don't necessarily want to encourage a "groupthink" mentality.

The thing is, when you agree with the masses, people don't necessarily feel like they need an explanation, because it's obvious to most people.

But when a perspective is counter to the consensus, a good explanation provides some much needed context. That way, readers understand where that reviewer is coming from, rather than tossing them off as being F.O.S. or having some agenda.

 

[donnyv]

But only if this was (GFSR) Good Fishing Spot Review.

A few years back while researching property to buy, I stumbled upon some fishing forums and took a look for info about where good fishing spots were in the area.

Come to find out that many anglers are very protective of the fishing holes and spots they find. Forum rules forbid posting to the board the exact spots/address of the "good fishing holes". Mods would give a warning to those who ask and a ban to those who gave away their spots. It was only allowed through private messages.

It does make sense in a way. I do something similar at my private course. I require players to contact me to set up a tee time and for the correct address. I ask that they do not share or post my address on the internet. I don't allow walk ups and purposely have fake addresses on some Dg course directories so people I don't know don't just randomly show up.

Not trying to be mean or lie about the address. Just trying to protect my fishing (DG) spot too

 

[davetherocketguy]

Not trying to be mean or lie about the address. Just trying to protect my fishing (DG) spot too

There's a guy that does this very thing near where I live and not one person I know of has an issue with that. The course has been in the ground for 4 or so years and it has yet to be posted on anything like DGCR or uDisc. I don't think there is anything mean about that at all and I don't blame you for doing so.

 

[ru4por]

There's a guy that does this very thing near where I live and not one person I know of has an issue with that. The course has been in the ground for 4 or so years and it has yet to be posted on anything like DGCR or uDisc. I don't think there is anything mean about that at all and I don't blame you for doing so.

There would always be threesome (bogey, shide and ru4por) looking to join you on a venture to such a course. We don't bite and our collective bark is minimal.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Serious question, not rhetorical here. Is it ok to have a dissenter who provides a perspective outside the norm or do you think it's bad because it could dissuade people from playing a course that many others find very enjoyable?

I think is a good example of a dissenting review.

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/mobile/reviews.php?id=3596&mode=rev#89590

Reviewer's comments about what they don't like about the course support the rating (which is considerably lower than the average for that course).

But when you read the review, their rating makes sense given what the reviewer said. Maybe you share that perspective. Maybe you don't. Read and decide for yourself.

 

[dreadlock86]

it would be a good example if the majority of the cons listed were factually true, but they are not

 

[BogeyNoMore]

it would be a good example if the majority of the cons listed were factually true, but they are not

Point taken. Something we can't realize having never played the course.

I'm not gonna sift through the course photos, maps, and hole info page trying to fact check reviews for accuracy (not that it would provide what I'd need to call them out for B.S.)

At some point, we have to take what people write at face value.

Not saying TR's are the be all and end all, but I like to think we've earned the title "Trusted."

 

[dreadlock86]

i just try to keep it in mind myself when i'm reviewing. it's easy to remember more issues than may actually have been present when you're not digging the course vibe or not playing well or not having a good day or whatever. i try to spend a little extra time making sure i'm being as objective as i can be with my cons.

this reviewer seems to have played the course many times so it sounds like it's just not his preference. or maybe he always loses to his buddies here. either way, it's not full of long walks, crossing fairways, and dangerous tees. it does have a major road on one border of the park. you get close to it on a few holes but it's never in play. there are a couple internal park roads that border several holes and are OB. i could see how one might not like that aesthetically and just not dig the vibe. there are some filler holes but there are a number of cool holes with excellent elevation changes and specific lines required, a solid 3.75.

 

[Shallows]

i just try to keep it in mind myself when i'm reviewing. it's easy to remember more issues than may actually have been present when you're not digging the course vibe or not playing well or not having a good day or whatever. i try to spend a little extra time making sure i'm being as objective as i can be with my cons.

this reviewer seems to have played the course many times so it sounds like it's just not his preference. or maybe he always loses to his buddies here. either way, it's not full of long walks, crossing fairways, and dangerous tees. it does have a major road on one border of the park. you get close to it on a few holes but it's never in play. there are a couple internal park roads that border several holes and are OB. i could see how one might not like that aesthetically and just not dig the vibe. there are some filler holes but there are a number of cool holes with excellent elevation changes and specific lines required, a solid 3.75.

That's a great review, I'm grateful for your perspective! I've just had a different experience from my times playing it.
Edit: And mine is certainly the minority experience, hence all the backups here

 

[HyooMac]

This raises the always interesting question of how much "I didn't enjoy it the one time I played there" should be considered in review and rating. And by the way, the opposite is also true...how much should "I shot lights out there" be considered...

Personally, I try to make sure I understand where i am on that spectrum before I give it the numerical rating. I usually work that out by writing my review...and pulling out comments that really just reflect it -or leave them in, with some justification that others might feel the same way (long walks and blind holes are good example). Then I circle back to the rating, and make sure it's in synch with the guts of my review...

As always though, for me the review far outweighs the rating.

 

[autocrosscrx]

It gets tricky for me because disc golf seems to have what I feel is a bit of a masochist culture. We'll have a nice sunny 50 degree winter day and maybe 1 person will post on the local group that they are looking to play. But then we have a day where it is 35 degree day with 2 inches of rain and 5 people will post up looking to play rounds at the poorest draining course in the area. And you play with a group of sub 800 rated people that throw 250 feet and they insist on playing the 9000 foot layout instead of the 6000 foot layout where they'll be lucky to play bogey golf.

I'm not like that. So I'll play some of the courses that are universally loved, and as a MA3'ish player, I don't enjoy playing them at all. So that is challenging for me to rate.