Bad/Homer Course Reviews

[BogeyNoMore]

The entire review of Old Airport DGC:

"Pros: Lost a red/orange 2007 ace race Discraft Impact. Please DM this account if found. Sentimental value, cash reward."

i bet it gets pulled faster than a 1/2 disc maple hill review.

kind of funny that the same person gave it a longer review (and with actual content) on udisc and a 4.0 rating there.

:wall:

 

[davetherocketguy]

Genius review from Davo81

Pros: fun tight course to work on short drives

Other Thoughts: app needs to update the course stats. the pars are generous in the app

:|

 

[Pevio]

From the cons section of this review:

ALL Bathrooms closed in Winter. Im sorry but how can a public park close every...single...bathroom for the winter? Do they think people aren't using the park during that time of year? Is the park staff too busy checking empty trashcans to maintain a few toilets. This is a huge pet peeve, especially when you've got to take the Browns to the Super Bowl. In the words of Randy Moss, "C'mon Man!"

 

[thrembo]

From the cons section of this review:

Yeah, that is absurd. Browns ain't been to no Super Bowls.

 

[Beable]

Is it bad form to PM people to ask them to really think about their rating? There are currently two 4.5 rating reviews for Crooked Creek. That rating is ludicrous and led me to drive out there when I should not have. I'd rather that didn't happen to other people.

The course was fine and I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong. But a 4.5 is worth a drive, in my opinion. If I lived near Crooked Creek, I'd definitely go there and play every once in awhile. Schenley is near me and pre-Covid I would just head over and play there whenever I felt like it.

 

[Jukeshoe]

Urgh...Don't usually call out reviews regardless of score, but I'm a bit bummed by the poor rating Leila Arboretum recently got tagged with...:shrug:

 

[wellsbranch250]

Is it bad form to PM people to ask them to really think about their rating? There are currently two 4.5 rating reviews for Crooked Creek. That rating is ludicrous and led me to drive out there when I should not have. I'd rather that didn't happen to other people.

The course was fine and I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong. But a 4.5 is worth a drive, in my opinion. If I lived near Crooked Creek, I'd definitely go there and play every once in awhile. Schenley is near me and pre-Covid I would just head over and play there whenever I felt like it.

probably not. I think I only did it once before on a 1/2 disc review of maple hill, which got me no-where. I have personally suggested that reviews that have more unhelpfuls than helpfuls shouldn't count towards the course's rating, but that hasn't gotten me anywhere either. so in the meantime, i like to add comments like, "i cant believe i drove 3 hours to play this average course" or "the course is somehow rated a 4.5, which is very disrespectful to all the other wonderful courses in the area. i had to re-check the browser before posting this review to make sure i wasn't on udisc."

nice review by-the-way

 

[DavidSauls]

Is it bad form to PM people to ask them to really think about their rating? There are currently two 4.5 rating reviews for Crooked Creek. That rating is ludicrous and led me to drive out there when I should not have. I'd rather that didn't happen to other people.

The course was fine and I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong. But a 4.5 is worth a drive, in my opinion. If I lived near Crooked Creek, I'd definitely go there and play every once in awhile. Schenley is near me and pre-Covid I would just head over and play there whenever I felt like it.

Just post an honest and fair review, for the sake of the next potential visitor. In the long run, inflated reviews draw people who will then give more mainline reviews, and the course rating will correct itself by consensus.

 

[Jimb]

I've played Crooked Creek a few times and agree that 4.5 is unfounded. I like the course. I might just have to review it to get that rating normalized some more. And yes, your review was helpful, Beable.

Others already said, it but contacting the reviewers probably isn't worth your time.

 

[Beable]

Just post an honest and fair review, for the sake of the next potential visitor. In the long run, inflated reviews draw people who will then give more mainline reviews, and the course rating will correct itself by consensus.

Yeah that seems like a more reasonable approach.

 

[davetherocketguy]

Yeah that seems like a more reasonable approach.

Yes it is. Smart folks will look at all the reviews collectively. One 0.5 review on a 4.0 course is going to stand out as an anomaly for sure. Also, when I go to a course with a single review unless its from a reviewer I usually agree with I will go into it with an open mind realizing that the single review has the potential to be good or a load of crap or somewhere in the middle.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Urgh...Don't usually call out reviews regardless of score, but I'm a bit bummed by the poor rating Leila Arboretum recently got tagged with...:shrug:

Yeah, they we're just peeved the course plays so much above their skill level. Leila's at least as good as Matawan HS...

 

[autocrosscrx]

It is really hard to review courses. It is even harder to pick a number in .5 increments and have that mean something to other people that may have totally different tastes and motivations.

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

It is really hard to review courses. It is even harder to pick a number in .5 increments and have that mean something to other people that may have totally different tastes and motivations.

Is it? If you've played enough courses, you should have a sense of, A. that was one of the best I've ever played (4.5-5.0), B. it was very good/great (3.5-4.0), C. it was ok/average (2.0-3.0), D. that course wasn't good (1.0-1.5), or E. that was one of the worst courses I've ever played/the designer should be ashamed (0.0-0.5). Don't worry about trying to split hairs and see if a course deserves a 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

It is really hard to review courses. It is even harder to pick a number in .5 increments and have that mean something to other people that may have totally different tastes and motivations.

Is it? If you've played enough courses, you should have a sense of, A. that was one of the best I've ever played (4.5-5.0), B. it was very good/great (3.5-4.0), C. it was ok/average (2.0-3.0), D. that course wasn't good (1.0-1.5), or E. that was one of the worst courses I've ever played/the designer should be ashamed (0.0-0.5). Don't worry about trying to split hairs and see if a course deserves a 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5.

What Craig said.

Ideally, you're basically comparing a course to every other course out there. Until you've played a lot of courses, you're limited by what you've seen. I have to include myself in that.

I didn't feel knew enough to write an objective review until I'd played 30 or so courses. Even then, my basis for comparison was limited, because I'd only played what was in my area and maybe a bit beyond that. When you've played a dozen or so courses in your area, its pretty easy to see the best of those as a 4.0 or better... because, relative to what you've seen/played, it is great... or at least feels that way.

But is it really that great?

It wasn't till I started getting around MI and the surrounding states, that I realized:"Hudson Mills is pretty good... but maybe it ain't quite a 4.0." In fact, now that I've seen a bit more, perhaps I've been a tad generous with some of my local courses.":\


Now that I've seen more, I don't think there's a course in Metro Detroit area that's better than a 3.5 except for: Addison Oaks (4.0) , Kensington Green (3.75) and Toboggan (5.0). We have many good to very good courses, but those are the only ones I feel are really worth travelling to play.

 

[Jimb]

Is it? If you've played enough courses, you should have a sense of, A. that was one of the best I've ever played (4.5-5.0), B. it was very good/great (3.5-4.0), C. it was ok/average (2.0-3.0), D. that course wasn't good (1.0-1.5), or E. that was one of the worst courses I've ever played/the designer should be ashamed (0.0-0.5). Don't worry about trying to split hairs and see if a course deserves a 3.5, 4.0, or 4.5.

All true, for sure.

But when you haven't played many courses and you start reviewing, things can certainly be skewed by inexperience. I know I rated some courses early on higher than I would now. I just didn't know what a great course, or a lousy course, was.

Having played Moraine and Idlewild, I think I can say that I've played some of the best. And having played "Almost" Fun Junction, I know what a really bad course is. The lines can get blurred for me , even now, with much of the tweeners courses.

I'm also a bit obsessive/compulsive, so it's nearly impossible for me to assign much home course bias. Sure, I can attach emotions to a course, good or bad. I think that's part of where .5-1 rating differences can easily be justified from player to player.

 

[autocrosscrx]

I feel like I value the comments about ten times as much as the ratings.

I can share a lot of things that I think will or could shape one's experience, but choosing between a 2.5 or a 3 on a 9 hole course that I really like is tough for me.

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

I feel like I value the comments about ten times as much as the ratings.

I can share a lot of things that I think will or could shape one's experience, but choosing between a 2.5 or a 3 on a 9 hole course that I really like is tough for me.

Don't sweat the small stuff. As you said the details in the review are what's essential. The difference between 2.5 and 3.0 is negligible.

If you want, maybe wait until you've got more played courses under your belt. See if you can arrange those courses from best to worst. Then see If you can give them ratings. As you play new courses, you'll see you may want to adjust some ratings. For example, a course you initially rate 4.5 or 5.0 may get lowered over time as you discover there are better courses than you've played before.

 

[autocrosscrx]

Don't sweat the small stuff. As you said the details in the review are what's essential. The difference between 2.5 and 3.0 is negligible.

If you want, maybe wait until you've got more played courses under your belt. See if you can arrange those courses from best to worst. Then see If you can give them ratings. As you play new courses, you'll see you may want to adjust some ratings. For example, a course you initially rate 4.5 or 5.0 may get lowered over time as you discover there are better courses than you've played before.

So I've played some highly rated courses. And I've read enough reviews and comments to get an idea of what people like or at least what people rate highly....and it doesn't necessarily seem to align with what makes a course fun for me.

 

[thrembo]

What Craig said.

Ideally, you're basically comparing a course to every other course out there. Until you've played a lot of courses, you're limited by what you've seen. I have to include myself in that.

I didn't feel knew enough to write an objective review until I'd played 30 or so courses. Even then, my basis for comparison was limited, because I'd only played what was in my area and maybe a bit beyond that. When you've played a dozen or so courses in your area, its pretty easy to see the best of those as a 4.0 or better... because, relative to what you've seen/played, it is great... or at least feels that way.

But is it really that great?

It wasn't till I started getting around MI and the surrounding states, that I realized:"Hudson Mills is pretty good... but maybe it ain't quite a 4.0." In fact, now that I've seen a bit more, perhaps I've been a tad generous with some of my local courses.":\


Now that I've seen more, I don't think there's a course in Metro Detroit area that's better than a 3.5 except for: Addison Oaks (4.0) , Kensington Green (3.75) and Toboggan (5.0). We have many good to very good courses, but those are the only ones I feel are really worth travelling to play.

It's all a bit subjective. Personally I didn't care for Addison Oaks, But really like Hudson Mills. Stop haten' on the Mills Man!!!! lol (I would travel to play Rolling Hills. Shame it's so costly.)