Can a pitch and putt course be top 10?

[upfromtheashes]

I don't think course should have its ceiling lowered only because its on a small piece of land. That should be considered an uncontrollable.
I know there may be some NASCAR fans out there. Would the same logic be applied to the Bristol Motor Speedway? Would it not be considered top notch because it is only a half mile track?
A course of any size could get a 5 star rating.
Radcliff could easily be a 5 star course. There are a couple factors that keep it from it. Mostly due to the close proximity of non disc golfer using the park.

This is where you and I disagree. Radcliff is a fine course and I've played it many times. The designers did a great job with what I would call a smaller-than-average plot of land on which to build a disc golf course. But I can't imagine any possibly way that Radcliff could ever deserve the same rating I gave Idlewild (5*).

 

[BigAl724]

Kinda odd, on the home page M.M. is listed as number 8 of top courses. But when you click on the 'more top rated courses' tab, the course isn't even listed in the top 25. In fact, there are a few other differences.

 

[Halcón]

DGCRs own review guidelines say "Remember, a "5" is considered the ultimate. There is absolutely nothing that could be done to improve the course. It is perfect in every possible way."

Natural Tees, if well-done and well-maintained, and single-chain baskets, may be overcome by outstanding design and setting...

Not sure how a single chain basket could fall under these guidelines. It's not perfect in every possible way. Or even natural teepads, which turn to crap in the rain.

Reviews shouldn't use course extras to overcome shortcomings. If a course is perfect in every way, except the tee signs...then it's really not perfect in every way. Right? I think a lot of reviewers forget this.

Then again, it's a guideline, not set in stone.

 

[DavidSauls]

There are conflicting standards on a "5". "Absolutely nothing can be done....perfect in every way." is simply unattainable. With that standard, there is no such things as "5".

But my post was about Top 10, not a "5" rating.

For "best of the best", I think a course could have extras that overcome the shortcomings. I know the best courses I ever played have some shortcomings, but the good points are spectacular enough to overcome them.

 

[Halcón]

You're right David. But the Top 10 all have ratings above 4.68, which is practically synonymous with a "5." Selah is a 4.98. I've never played it, but is it "perfect?"

I agree that there are conflicting standards for a "5."

 

[Stardoggy]

Perfect courses

I would in the camp that a "pitch n putt" can't be top 10. It just can't. Even on it's bad days, I'd think Highbridge has at LEAST three courses (Blueberry, Granite Ridge, Gold) that top it. When mowed, I'd have a hard time seeing MM (which I haven't played, just judging by the pix) holding up to Woodland Greens at HBH.

I could give more examples...Rollin Ridge (http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=5189), for instance. That place is sick, offers three sets of concrete tees, more variety, etc.

I have learned to take the ratings on here with a grain of salt, to be sure.

 

[mndiscg]

This course is probably very similar to Phantom Falls. Paulie is the owner/guide and is very personable. Awesome scenery.

For me, long championship courses are not as fun as courses that I can make a few ace runs on.

For those not from the mountain area, rain doesn't affect mountain natural pads as much as your muddy dirt natural pads.

For those commenting on single-chain baskets, those were temporary and are all now replaced by disc-in baskets which are very nice.

I haven't played Phantom Falls, Magic Meadows or Bucksnort but hope to play them all soon. I played Beaver Ranch (5) and Bailey (4.5) last year and enjoyed them a lot. Bailey was held back by all the different kinds of baskets (many old) and their natural pads but that was only because they were very loose and not as well maintained as the other private courses.

 

[DavidSauls]

I will say, as an aside, that having played 110+ courses in 24 states, one of my absolute favorites had single-chain baskets---Innova Sports, at that. Still Water Farms is extinct, but the layout was so awesome that, even with the baskets, it was better than almost anywhere else I've played.

 

[ZMan44]

It does seem that it currently has a lot of drive-by reviews. Bjreagh, (diamond-level TR) and I are playing Magic Meadows a week from Monday...so I'm sure our reviews will be up sometime soon. Playing Phantom Falls and Beaver Ranch while on the trip as well.

We've both played Flip City, Idlewild, the Highbridge courses among nearly 140 others...so we should be able to give a fair review in comparison of other courses. Looking forward to exploring the hype.

 

[MPaq720]

Bjreagh, (diamond-level TR) and I are playing Magic Meadows a week from Monday...so I'm sure our reviews will be up sometime soon. Playing Phantom Falls and Beaver Ranch while on the trip as well.

Don't forget to play Bailey while you're up there. It's a great course and can really kick your a$$

 

[upfromtheashes]

It does seem that it currently has a lot of drive-by reviews. Bjreagh, (diamond-level TR) and I are playing Magic Meadows a week from Monday...so I'm sure our reviews will be up sometime soon. Playing Phantom Falls and Beaver Ranch while on the trip as well.

I'm just going to point out that I'm a wee bit jealous of the life that you lead.

 

[magictenor1]

I don'r rate based on how long the holes on a course are. I like small technical courses and a review is your opinion anyway so I rate according to what I like. However if courses don't have nice teepads or signage or restrooms for instance then they will not rate as high. Best of the best should be just that.

 

[ohtobediscing]

I would in the camp that a "pitch n putt" can't be top 10. It just can't. Even on it's bad days, I'd think Highbridge has at LEAST three courses (Blueberry, Granite Ridge, Gold) that top it. When mowed, I'd have a hard time seeing MM (which I haven't played, just judging by the pix) holding up to Woodland Greens at HBH.

I could give more examples...Rollin Ridge (http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=5189), for instance. That place is sick, offers three sets of concrete tees, more variety, etc.

I have learned to take the ratings on here with a grain of salt, to be sure.

Or it could be that you're a homer from WI. You've played two, count 'em, II [2] courses outside of your home state. :doh: Really, just shut up.

You know, the pictures look nice, but then, I haven't played the course. I wouldn't think a PnP or 9er could rate much more than a 3.5, but I'd sure like to know what a TR thinks.

 

[Deuces]

Sure it could. A beautiful unique piece of land + great imagination + loads of hard work is what it takes to make a magical place. I personally would like to play discgolf around raging rivers and waterfalls. That sort of land is usually not what we are given to work with, but it would be the perfect setting for a short but techincal course with spectacular scenery and challenging water hazards holes.

 

[tomdizzlefizzle]

I think most pros would consider flip pitch and putt.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I remember when most courses were boring compared to today and far apart from each other in terms of a day's drive. Therefore, I'm apt to be kind to most courses if I were to rate many. If it has adequate baskets, tees, and you can locate the holes...then it's going to be a 4.0 in my mind if the holes are interesting. We live in a time of milk and honey.

I also agree that the beloved Flip City isn't a 5. Too many of the holes are too easy. The addition of a few of the alternate holes made it an in-state destination course; especially that second one. One of my favorite holes. But a 5? Naw. It's a 4.5 because it's an awesome place and extremely fun round. Bill is so cool, too. I'm a good 2 hours away or so and make sure I play at least once a year. (My parents actually met at a lake resort 8 miles away from there in 1970 and we still go back annually. I played Flip City when the baskets were first put in...)

I like to think a course deserving a "5" has most of the course featuring risk/reward options, holes with myriad choices to shoot, and awesome, tasty obstacles and terrain...all designed masterfully and aesthetically. I don't care at all about tees and signage so long as they adequately do the job.

Fives for me are De Laveaga (although I haven't played it since 1999), Circle R in Wimberly (R.I.P., had the opportunity to play it twice in my life), and closer to me, Fallasburg near Grand Rapids and Burchfield near Lansing. I haven't played anything else yet that warrants a 5.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I forgot to add...One of the factors in my mind that separates a great course from the rest of them is when your scores vary a lot on it. You know you have a problem when you're always right near the same score whether you're throwing well or poorly.

Great short holes follow this line of thinking. You can deuce them with a great drive, or if your drive sucks, you're sweating bullets trying to get up and down and will probably take a four.

 

[bjreagh]

I am looking forward to playing some of the highly regarded Colorado courses later this month.

I rate courses on all factors, not just length- and longer is not necessarily better (go ahead and put that quote in your signature ) So to answer the original question, yes a course can be "short" and still be awesome. Courses can also be too long if it is just open and boring on every shot. A person's definition of "short" and "pitch and putt" also varies. I like longer challenging courses that really make you work, but I really enjoy playing ace and birdie fest courses as well.

Yes, Flip is shorter than others in the top 10. Bryant Lake from the short tees is very short and has been in the top 10 before. So what, if the majority of people like a course, then it deserves a high rating.

 

[kyflash]

This is where you and I disagree. Radcliff is a fine course and I've played it many times. The designers did a great job with what I would call a smaller-than-average plot of land on which to build a disc golf course. But I can't imagine any possibly way that Radcliff could ever deserve the same rating I gave Idlewild (5*).

I am not saying that Radcliff is a 5star. It could be if it were the same course that did not have to contend with: joggers, walkers, playgrounds nearby, parking lot that comes into play on 18, and other items.
There is no comparison to Radcliff and Idlewilde.
I am just stating that a pitch and putt such as Radcliff can be a 5star course. There are several variables that keep Radcliff from being a 5star.

 

[upfromtheashes]

I am not saying that Radcliff is a 5star. It could be if it were the same course that did not have to contend with: joggers, walkers, playgrounds nearby, parking lot that comes into play on 18, and other items.
There is no comparison to Radcliff and Idlewilde.
I am just stating that a pitch and putt such as Radcliff can be a 5star course. There are several variables that keep Radcliff from being a 5star.

Yeah that's what I mean...I wouldn't give Radcliff a 5-star rating even if all of those factors didn't exist. It could never be as good as Idlewild even if there were no roads and no parking lots and no playgrounds.

When giving out ratings, courses should be measured against one another. That's how we figure out which courses are actually the best. A course's rating shouldn't just be a self-contained deal where the only thing a course gets compared to is itself (ie "how good is this course compared to it's potential?")