Do Private Courses Get Rated Higher?

[notapro]

Oh ok. But every other review you've done has no caveats and conform to your strict guidelines.

 

[Dave242]

OK....I'll bite. Name one other one that I have deviated from my normal rubric.

 

[Menacewarf]

Well.....I guess my thoughts and definitions of Objective course ratings criteria is different that DGCR's. While I don't think I am wrong, I think that I am wrong to ever have had expectations/hopes that reviews and ratings will ever be other than what DGCR defines as objective. :doh: :wall: :gross: :thmbdown:

From here:

Category I, "Essential properties of a good course"
Baskets: (condition, make, etc)
Tee Pads: (material, condition, level?, etc)
Tee Signs/Maps/Markers: (present?, condition, clarity, accuracy)

Category II "Combine with cat I to make a great course"
General Course Design: (flow, loop back to start?, crossing fairways?, well defined fairways, etc)
Foliage Maintenance: (underbrush?, poison oak?, stinging nettles?, blackberries, etc, trees trimmed accordingly, grass cut regularly?)
Benches & Trash bins: (present?, condition?, emptied regularly?)

Category III "bonus attributes to make an excellent course"
Elevation: (present?, optimized?, etc)
Epic Holes: (There are some holes you will never forget throwing)
Camping
Restrooms
Running water
Variety of hole distances
Variety of shots required
Mix of tight technical & Open bombs
Overall challenge
Parking
Scenic beauty
Crowded or not?
Regular events to participate in
Attitude of locals
and on and on and on.

------------

Course/airway design is relegated to simply bonus points? Come on man......

On each of these points ask yourself, "Due to this point how much am I more likely to play this course over and over and over?"

I agree this is BS. I am a sucker for grass roots disc but some of my favoriate courses have (or had ) no baskets, tee pads that are natural, and signs which are home made and worn. Despire all of this these courses have great holes, great land, and a great experience. If the above were up to me category 1 and 3 would be swapped because I agree, it should first be about the airways, second about the land and third about the amenities. That is just me but I don't think I'll ever be convinced otherwise.

 

[Dave242]

My preferred hypothetical on this subject is to imagine a particular quality private course going public---bought by the local parks dept. and opened to the public, free to play. Would that change your rating?

It is a little hard for me to wrap my head around this when I think of specific private courses. This is due to changes the park department would make - mainly parking and modifications for safety reasons. And things like design done for low usage that would need to change to accommodate crowds - fairway conflict mainly (too close to each other and/or crossing, baskets too close to tees, etc).

If a top-notch private course (pick your favorite) went public, and the parks department kept the layout and maintenance, you'd probably rate it the same.

I think this is an interesting and appropriate case study: Just yesterday someone PM'ed me and asked me my justification for rating Schenley and Flip City the same. Then I noticed the same point made a few days ago in a thread and posted my reply here.

Look at the reviews from Schenley and notice how that course gets hammered for all the things we are talking about. Spend a little time paging through the pictures to notice how nice it is and also to get a flavor of the terrain and fairways (lots of the wooded ones don't have pix unfortunately).

From an airway design standpoint, I would contend that Schenley (2.92) is better than Flip City (4.86).

I would say that in a lot of ways the 2 courses themselves are very similar (other than the private/public thing).....and yet they are rated almost 2 full points apart! Flip has 2-3 holes that are much more fun than anything at Schenly, but not enough to account for even 1.0 disc difference....probably 0.5 rating.

 

[gdub58]

Dave:

I just read virtually this entire thread - specifically the tangent about your rating of Flyboy - and wanted to say that FWIW I agree completely with your assessment. I played Flyboy right after Kelly redesigned it because of the closure of the runway hole. In fact, I believe he mentioned that we were the first group to play the new design. We played with Kelly and Phil Arthur, which combined with all of the hospitality, was just phenomenal.

And, although I had every intention of reviewing the course when I returned, I didn't largely because I did not think the course itself deserved a five-disc rating and I didn't feel like having to defend that opinion. So, I have much respect for you and your position.

I live near Idlewild, and I think its design is superior to Flyboy, but to be fair that has probably as much to do with the land each designer had to work with and the fact that Kelly had to do it within some pretty daunting obstacles homeowner-wise. But, neither that nor all of the "extras" he offers should give him a break in a completely objective rating system.

 

[notapro]

OK....I'll bite. Name one other one that I have deviated from my normal rubric.

Ha, nah... I am not going to go on a witch hunt. It's just that I see this:

I am starting to really like my rubric of basing the majority of my review on the "airway" design of the course.

Well.....I guess my thoughts and definitions of Objective course ratings criteria is different that DGCR's. While I don't think I am wrong, I think that I am wrong to ever have had expectations/hopes that reviews and ratings will ever be other than what DGCR defines as objective.

You are right - I would rate it exactly the same, but the vast majority of DGCR users do not put the same effort in and do not use the same criteria as I do....so they would rate it much lower.

You're human just like the rest of us. Saying that short holes are Flyboy are a CON and short holes at Campton are a PRO is just silliness.

I don't care at all, until you start poo-pooing other people's reviews for being 'too subjective' or of the 'DGCR mentality' or just being generally inferior to yours.

 

[notapro]

As usual, I must add the note that I don't mean to be disparaging or insulting. I am definitely on your side that the course should be rated on its own; I don't care about benches, bathrooms, hell, even tee signs are a minor factor in my rating.

But I definitely respect everyone else's ratings that take this into account. Different people value different things, including you and I. I would never want to preach about my reviews being better or worse than anyone else's.

 

[Flyboy]

I'm killing time in Tokyo, waiting to fly to Singapore and stumbled onto this thread. Quite ammusing to me, all the Flyboy buzz from you guys! I'll just say thanks to all of you who've made the effort to come visit me and my folks, it's been our pleasure, and we appreciate the kind words in your reviews.

I don't consider myself a "course reviewer" so I can't add much to this discussion. I've only rated two courses, Flyboy and Flip. They both peg my fun meter so I gave them 5s, simple as that. Other fun meter peggers would be Flat Rock, BRP (just played 2 days ago), and Idlewild....well worth whatever effort and cost it took to get there and play them. I swear I'll get off my butt and award them the "5s" they deserve eventually.

To answer just a couple of your comments in the thread:

Those pesky small trees around 13's basket, I've cursed them a hundred times myself and vowed to take at least some of them out. Next round I play, the chainsaw goes with me. Thanx for the input.

Avery and Val's "4" reviews (of course, these guys aren't your typical DGCR reviewers). They visited along with Nate Doss way back when I was still tweaking the course design, some of the first touring Pro's to come here. I was honored to have their input and made several changes based on that. They played the 27 holes in excruciating summer heat, on pratically no sleep the night before their arrival at Flyboy (Val had gotten to bed at 4am and slept in a chair for gosh sakes!). After our hole 18 lunch break, we could hardly get them to finish the last 9 holes! Needless to say, wasn't as much fun as it could have been and I hope they'll come back and play the course again in the Spring or Fall, and with lots of design improvements made since then.

Dave, I appreciate your insights and what you add to the site. I would hope a guy with your passion for course design gets the opportunity to design and build your own course someday. The "4" you gave my course is certainly no skin off my teeth. For the record, I don't care what your personal course preferences are any more than I care if you prefer chicken over fish. You use your own "personal preference" rating system, I use my Fun meter, Prerube, Tall, New, Connor, Mashy, and the rest of you guys all have your own way of writing reviews, and in the end it all averages out. For the most part, it's all good for the dude who calls up the site to see if he wants to make the investment to hit a particular course, just like Tim envisioned when he built this thing.

I would like to invite you back though Dave. You whipped through the course all by yourself without escort (an exception to the rules I've only made once) in a record 1.5 hours in 1/4 mile fog, according to Wayne (my Dad). The average 27-hole round out here takes at least 4 hours to play. I've personallly never played it by myself in less than 2 hours and thats really humping it! Give it another shot sometime, maybe there's more chicken out here than you thought.

Happy discing Guys,
Kelly

 

[bholy08]

^ quality post Thansk for the input into the discussion.

 

[Connor Jones]

Kelly, you are the man.

 

[Dave242]

As usual, I must add the note that I don't mean to be disparaging or insulting.

I do not feel disparaged or insulted at all. But.....wow, reading this quoted sounds like I am disparaging and insulting to everyone on DGCR.

You are right - I would rate it exactly the same, but the vast majority of DGCR users do not put the same effort in and do not use the same criteria as I do....so they would rate it much lower.

I am embarrassed to have written that and it stands on its own as about as arrogant as you can get. While not the most humble person in the world, I try to be respectful and I was not with what I wrote. My apologies.

My hope was to state that my "effort" (that is different than many/most), is not in conscientious reviewing, but in separating out as much subjectivity as possible and mainly focusing on the course and much less on the "experience". Not that that is better or more right....but it is just what I do as an analytic.

 

[BrotherDave]

I would like to invite you back though Dave. You whipped through the course all by yourself without escort (an exception to the rules I've only made once) in a record 1.5 hours in 1/4 mile fog, according to Wayne (my Dad). The average 27-hole round out here takes at least 4 hours to play. I've personallly never played it by myself in less than 2 hours and thats really humping it! Give it another shot sometime, maybe there's more chicken out here than you thought.

 

[Dave242]

Saying that short holes are Flyboy are a CON and short holes at Campton are a PRO is just silliness.

It is not silliness at all. It is very consistent and logical......and way off topic. PM me if you want.

I am not intending to say my way is better......but that it is a much better way to objectively rate something that is quite subjective in nature. So, if the goal of reviewing here is to be subjective I am stating that my my way is much worse.

 

[Dave242]

Kelly - first off, thanks for joining the discussion and posting in a thoughtful and accommodating way (as I fully would have expected). Hope you can join in the banter more often!

For the record, I don't care what your personal course preferences are any more than I care if you prefer chicken over fish. You use your own "personal preference" rating system, I use my Fun meter, Prerube, Tall, New, Connor, Mashy, and the rest of you guys all have your own way of writing reviews, and in the end it all averages out. For the most part, it's all good for the dude who calls up the site to see if he wants to make the investment to hit a particular course, just like Tim envisioned when he built this thing.

That is totally true and you had stated that much in our emails.....that is why I have felt comfortable using your "slice of heaven" that you have poured so much into as a "case study" in the topic of the thread. In my mind, this thread is about the reviewers and fans of your course.....not your course per se (but things always go off topic).

My hope is that not only the reviews of us more travelled reviewers are helpful, but that our ratings lists are helpful. Maybe one day timg will make things filterable by favorite reviewers then you can find what like-minded people think.....not a conglomerate of the masses as it is now. I write reviews from my personal perspective/tastes and so hopefully other people who have the same specific tastes can benefit. I have no issue when people with different tastes disagree.

BTW, I did design a course....also now an "extinct" private course. I had about 3 acres to work with and am very proud of how well and creatively I crammed 18 separate fairways into it (all very legit DG holes that test real and varied DG skills). Hopefully one day I'll get a chance to do something more than a rinky dink joke of a course......and I can only dream of ever doing something like you have done at Flyboy.

 

[Dave242]

I would like to invite you back though Dave. You whipped through the course all by yourself without escort (an exception to the rules I've only made once) in a record 1.5 hours in 1/4 mile fog, according to Wayne (my Dad). The average 27-hole round out here takes at least 4 hours to play. I've personallly never played it by myself in less than 2 hours and thats really humping it! Give it another shot sometime, maybe there's more chicken out here than you thought.

Doh - I have tried to keep the exception to the rule you made for me a secret. Thanks for accommodating me and my family - we had a 6.0+ rated time! I would love to come back and play a round with you....even more so to meet you and to chat course design stuff than find chicken. Just please hide the pitchforks!

BTW, I was curious as to the walking distance of the course and I used Google Maps measuring tool to rough it out and it looks like 3.7 miles. So that is only 2.5 miles/hour to walk the course in 1.5 hours (and I think it was closer to 1hr 50min). I had plenty of time time to survey things from tee pad, mid fairway in a few places and looking back from the basket and even pace things off in several cases (like I do for every course).

Did I get this right?

 

[Connor Jones]

So did you play the course, or did you just walk it?

 

[BrotherDave]

So did you play the course, or did you just walk it?

 

[Dave242]

There is a disc in the drink on 15 and one at 23 if that answers your question. :doh:

I throw LHBH and I played just a smidge too far left on 15 and it nicked the last branch before things open up to the left and it kicked in. My first throw was a ~200' Roc shot and my second shot was supposed to be a S-curve "bomb" (at least for a noodle arm 360' max sort of guy) so I could get to the corner of the lake and try a crazy shot up and over the dam and get close to the pin on the next shot for my birdie 4. I took a circle 7.

My "safe" lay-up shot took a huge skip on 23 (after a lazy hyzer when I meant to throw a line drive into the ground).....I have no I idea why I threw my favorite TL on that hole - guess I thought it was a gimme layup, but I should have used my Roc. I only had my travel bag and my go-for disc I would have used for that hole was left with Davy Jones at 15. Circle 4 (missed my approach throw-in par-save by inches). I did come back with a birdie on 24 as you would hope a lefty would (straddle put from the bushes to the right of the basket).

I could give you a full blow-by-blow of the entire round if you want.

 

[Dave242]

Woops - I meant hole 25 for the 2nd dunking I took.

 

[Mattallica]

Woops - I meant hole 25 for the 2nd dunking I took.

Makes way more sense