Do YOU agree with the "Top Course" list?

[billnchristy]

I agree that this site is the place to be if you want to design a rec-int level course or advice for making a dual purpose course that could be pro tourney level and converted back and forth with ease.

I think if we are not going to branch into the private market for gold level courses then something that has a dual role is going to be necessary.

 

[mashnut]

I agree that this site is the place to be if you want to design a rec-int level course or advice for making a dual purpose course that could be pro tourney level and converted back and forth with ease.

I think if we are not going to branch into the private market for gold level courses then something that has a dual role is going to be necessary.

Good point, but I think it is possible to have gold level courses on public land in certain areas. Look at Cincinnati, they have a huge disc golf scene that supports a whole bunch of courses at all levels, from 9 hole pitch n putts up to blue and gold level courses like Banklick and Idlewild. You just have to be conscious of what the local scene will support, and how well you have provided for all different levels of players. I do agree that putting a new course in a town with no other courses, a monster gold level course isn't the way to go.

 

[Dave242]

Here it could be anything. Scoot_er wants that challenging PDGA-level course. Some hacker with a 220' max drive wants a course where he can rack out some birdies and have a good time. Their rating of the same course are going to be different. Who is right? It depends on your point of view. That's why you can rate a course with an average score of a 4 and give it a 1.5 without it getting deleted. You are entitled to your opinion. That is all this site is, opinions. Nobody is claiming that our opinions are qualified.

What we are doing with our ratings is creating a database of data. Things are not set up this way, but with some coding timg could do something like this:
Allow users to select their favorite reviewers (the reviewers they trust and whose preferences match theirs) and use only those ratings to compute the ratings list. At this point there is probably not enough data to make things valid using this approach, but down the road there will be.

That is why I am a fan of being able to enter your ratings list (if you have played say 50 or more courses) without a review. There would be a ton of value in doing that, IMO.

In lieu of that, I have done what I have done. But, I was forced to enter review verbiage, so I entered bare bones rationale for my ratings......to a flurry of thumbs down.

 

[biscoe]

I would mark you down for the rotting bovine carcasses, though.

damn, it's like you played it already. those are few and far between. i think of it as an opportunity to educate the city folk about the cycles of life and where their food comes from.

 

[harr0140]

Along simlar lines, I have only ranked one course a 5 (Blue RIbbon pines) (but was very close to giving Winter Park a 5 also) and if I play better courses than it I will certainly adjust my rating. I do intend to keep finding what I can in the top 10 to play and will always adjust, but a course that gets a 5 now may not get a 4.5 in 10 years. So the ratings of these courses are only valid at the time they were reviewed. Over time the new ratings will adjust the once great courses!

 

[harr0140]

Oops I forgot to say something else in my argument. Remember not all courses are designed for all skill levels, so there is going to be massive swings in ratings of courses based on ability of the player in question. If you were knew and you played the hardest course inthe world, you likely wouldnt rate it a 4.5 or 5 because you struggled so mightiliy, lost 10 discs, slipped on some rough terrain, or whatever. Or if you are a top notch 1050 rated player and you go out and play a well designed course like Freeman Lake, Kaposia, or many other local favorites, you likely won't consider it the best because it isnt maintained enough, it didn't challenge you enough, you will always be looking for the absolute top and that is hard to find.

Just keep it all in perspective, just because a course is your home course does not mean it should be a five, someone in here already said they were glad to see their home course a 5, and I dont know who said it, or how much travelling they have done, but what are they relating it to?

We already had someone go in and do a top 10 by trusted reviewer which makes a lot of sense. You could do it only by players who have played 25, 50, or 100 courses so as to not skew the numbers by someone who has only played 5 courses. You could also do a top 10 based on only 1000 rated players. You could do a top 10 based on people who throw over 500 feet. You could do a top 10 based on the highest posters on DGCR (just to test their actual knowledge and ability) Hey new screening method for new members!!!! They have to play 10 courses and rank them accordingly! Just kidding, but you get my point, there are going to be different favorites for people of all abilities, people who have played a lot of courses compared to those with only a few, people who can throw 500 versus theose that max out at 225, people who are old versus the youngsters, people who want an isolated course, versus those that like the open park feel. It is all perspective and NO ONE of us can forumlate THE top 10, there are little top 10's all over this site. The true top 10 listed here is just an average of all the little top 10's.

 

[NDABRUSH]

i agree. isn't that what defines a 5? a 5 is supposed to mean that there is no way the course could be better. if a really great course has no elevation, it could be better.

i think what is confusing for a lot of reviewer is this: if a great course that you would like to call a 5 couldn't possibly be better, GIVEN THE REALITIES OF THE COURSE, is it still a 5? by that i mean, some places just don't have any water nearby. does that mean that you can't have a 5 rated course in the desert? does it mean you can't have a 5 rated course in the midwest where everything is flat? it is necessarily relative given the geographical features of any given region.

I guess it still comes back to personal preference since there is no form to correctly fill out in order to rate a course a 5. A course that has everything except water would be better than having everything except elevation in my opinion. High elevation shots have a better chance of capturing that elusive "WOW" factor than water shots. And again I assume a 5 must have wow factor. If there are 2 courses that are both rated 5 and 1 has everything and the other has everything except water and a true par 5 then there is a chance that the course with everything would have a higher average therfore putting it slightly above the other course. They would still both be fives overall though. Kinda of like Flip and Idle.

 

[grass_stain]

Branstorm is no where near a 4.5, sorry.

whatever. i am local so i fell i can't give it the desirved 5.

 

[grass_stain]

jk. i just love branstrom

 

[Scoot_er]

jk. i just love branstrom

I give it a 3............without playing it. lol

 

[grass_stain]

whatever, come out and see for yourselfs branstrom is a 5.5. no joke a 5.5. no one listen to tom he don't know!

 

[harr0140]

whatever, come out and see for yourselfs branstrom is a 5.5. no joke a 5.5. no one listen to tom he don't know!

Guys you are all missing the point . . . it may be a 3 to Tom, who has rated other courses like Flip City (5) and Winter Park (4). He has a reason to declare that even if you do not agree. I in fact gave Winter Park a 4.5, doesn't mean he is wrong or I am wrong it is a friggin opinion. The overall scores are the average of all scores.

Ask him why he thinks it is not a 4.5 dont just say he is wrong! People will come to any course anyways, it isn't like a 4 is a bad course! And by a true sense of the scale there is no such thing as a 5.5 so get over yourself. It may be a great course, but it is not above the scale, the other courses ratings just need to be adjusted over time. I don't know I haven't played it, so I can't say I agree with you or tomjulio, but I will make my own determination if I am able to play it regardless of what either of you have rated it as.

 

[grass_stain]

sorry it was a joke.

 

[Scoot_er]

whatever, come out and see for yourselfs branstrom is a 5.5. no joke a 5.5. no one listen to tom he don't know!

Maybe that is because you haven't even played any courses besides Flip that I have heard of in MI.

When you have been playing over a year then dispute why you think it is a 5.

I still think there is no 5 yet. maybe 4.5s but no 5's.

 

[mashnut]

I think it's a little silly to say there are no 5 disc courses. 5 discs here means it's the best of the best, so there are definitely courses that fit that. Are there any perfect courses? Probably not, but it's a little silly to not use the full rating scale because of that.

 

[harr0140]

Maybe that is because you haven't even played any courses besides Flip that I have heard of in MI.

When you have been playing over a year then dispute why you think it is a 5.

I still think there is no 5 yet. maybe 4.5s but no 5's.

That is one way to look at it I suppose, that the ideal course has yet to be designed.

BUT I rate all courses in comparison to all the other courses I have played. As courses get better, have better facilities, have better properties (not drainage sloughs, interstate frontages, wetlands, and other general low useability properties) the image of a 5 will change in my mind. I think there is no "best course in the world" right now, because the sport hasn't advanced enough to have one clearcut awesome course. But I do think there are many great great courses out there. I will adjust my ratings over time in comparison to the new courses I play.

As I have said I have only given one course a 5, maybe 5-6 courses a 4.5, and another 10 or so courses 4's.

I think it's a little silly to say there are no 5 disc courses. 5 discs here means it's the best of the best, so there are definitely courses that fit that. Are there any perfect courses? Probably not, but it's a little silly to not use the full rating scale because of that.

That last sentence makes a lot of sense actually. Although there may be no perfect course . . . yet . . . this sport is relatively young and disc golf design is getting stretched right now and that is good for the game. But when you consider "best of the best" that is possible right now. It does not say in the rating scale that a 5 is the perfect course (as that will never be accomplished because when the next best course is created, a new designer will design a new course that is better! And the cycle will repeat thus making the sliding scale of 5 discs change!

 

[Scoot_er]

I think it's a little silly to say there are no 5 disc courses. 5 discs here means it's the best of the best, so there are definitely courses that fit that. Are there any perfect courses? Probably not, but it's a little silly to not use the full rating scale because of that.

Yeah but that doesn't mean I won't rate some as 5's on here. The Phenomenal thing is what gets me I guess.

For example I would rate Blue Ribbon as a 4.5 and depending on how I feel I could give it a 5 according to the current way things are scaled.

If it helps I will keep it consistent on mine so a course which is rated a 3 on my scale is probably a 4 on most others. Still don't think this "Brainstorm" is best of the best but its a cool name.

 

[mashnut]

Yeah but that doesn't mean I won't rate some as 5's on here. The Phenomenal thing is what gets me I guess.

For example I would rate Blue Ribbon as a 4.5 and depending on how I feel I could give it a 5 according to the current way things are scaled.

If it helps I will keep it consistent on mine so a course which is rated a 3 on my scale is probably a 4 on most others.

That's fair, I wasn't trying to argue with how you want to rate courses as I think the great thing about this site is how much freedom everyone has in how they choose to evaluate courses. I was just saying that I think it's a little odd when people don't use the ends of the rating scale, compressing all the rating in toward the middle and making them less significant.

 

[harr0140]

That's fair, I wasn't trying to argue with how you want to rate courses as I think the great thing about this site is how much freedom everyone has in how they choose to evaluate courses. I was just saying that I think it's a little odd when people don't use the ends of the rating scale, compressing all the rating in toward the middle and making them less significant.

I wonder how certain people that will remain nameless (see also found disc polls) would rate a course in a wide open park where there is no chance for someone to lose a disc. Maybe they want te review courses on how easy it is to find discs! I guess that is their decision! Although I would hate to think someone only plays the game for found discs. I find enough as it is, why do I need to go intentionally search for them!!!!

 

[culinarywiz]

Yeah but that doesn't mean I won't rate some as 5's on here. The Phenomenal thing is what gets me I guess.

I can dig that. But the semantics shouldn't weigh so heavily.

A "1" is "Poor". Linguistically, how does that relate to "Bad" - which is a "0.5"?

Clearly, 1000 rated players have a desire to be challenged. In my newly humbled role, I still believe that when I play a course, I can tell if it was designed and maintained to reach the fullest potential. Those courses do exist.

For the record, I have only rated one course a 5. That is Flip City. Perhaps that review is considered "bandwagon". So be it. I still think of that course regularly...the care and commitment that has gone into it. Bill has provided us with a labor of love...literally. I may never come across a course more deserving.

Also, if the course ratings are to get people to move out and explore, why shouldn't we tempt them with scores that we feel are relative to a 2 day road trip?