Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app! It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
I think I'm with you on this. One person doing it is good fun, but if a lot of people doi it, it'd get old and quick.
Spiderman on hole 4.
Harry Potter on 12.
Gandalf on 18.
I posted that in the Explanation of the physics of flying discs thread.
https://www.dgcoursereview.com/threads/explanation-of-the-physics-of-flying-discs-fixed.25803/page-11#post-4250883
Just my personal opinion...
Many DGCR reviewers (and I'm guilty of it myself), provide too much detail, resulting reviews that feel more like essays. Maybe it's partly an effort to not write a U-Disc type review, but it can be hard to glean what you want from long reviews.
Lengthy reviews...
I scan them to see if the they actually tell me something about the course and how it plays.
As Pastor of Muppets said, some reviewers have a default format that makes it easier to find the what you want to know. I really appreciate that.
It'll be interesting to see how Salonen handles tomorrow with Kristin just 2 strokes behind her.
I suppose it'll be hard for anyone to catch her if she cards eight birdies again, six of them coming on successive holes (#'s 9 -14). That's a helluva streak.
That's pretty much how I feel.
But I think the OP was getting at, "How scratched up and/or wet does a card mate have to get, to satisfy the requirements of help ing to find a lost disc?
I'd say no rules can force a card mate to get cut on thorns or hump through wet bushes. They can scan...