I like decent/typical or just typical by itself. As long as average is not on 2 I'm ok with it.
-
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)
Over-rated and Under-rated courses
- Thread starter Innovadude
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,776
I applaud this change! (No surprises with that remark.) Well done sir! Take it from a totally unbiased source-- you made the right decision.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,072
Tim, a couple what I hope are final points.
Upon reflection "fair" may have the unintended interpretation of "balanced" or "impartial" so it may not be the best term to use.
And as for "decent", that seems a bit sub-par to me.
#include standard_olorin_par_shoutout.h
If I asked someone how the course was and they replied "It was decent"... a lot depends on the inflection, but in general I wouldn't take it to be very complimentary.
That being said how about this?
0.0 - Abysmal
0.5 - Bad
1.0 - Poor
1.5 - Passable
2.0 - Decent
2.5 - Typical
3.0 - Good
3.5 - Very Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Phenomenal
5.0 - Best of the Best
ERic
Upon reflection "fair" may have the unintended interpretation of "balanced" or "impartial" so it may not be the best term to use.
And as for "decent", that seems a bit sub-par to me.
#include standard_olorin_par_shoutout.h
If I asked someone how the course was and they replied "It was decent"... a lot depends on the inflection, but in general I wouldn't take it to be very complimentary.
That being said how about this?
0.0 - Abysmal
0.5 - Bad
1.0 - Poor
1.5 - Passable
2.0 - Decent
2.5 - Typical
3.0 - Good
3.5 - Very Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Phenomenal
5.0 - Best of the Best
ERic
A couple of our club members came up with this rating system. At least it takes in more aspects of the whole golfing experience.:
10 catagories, all somewhat subjective, a few totally subjective, add up to a total score. I tried to add a few descriptions so it would make more sense of what we were talking about, if more explaination is needed feel free to ask.
Clark-Johnson Disc Golf Course Scale
Rate everything with a 1, .75, .50, .25, or 0
Would I play it again?
1pt – I would definitely play it again.
.75—I would try and play it again if I were in the area.
.50—I could take it or leave it.
.25—I'm only playing here again if I have to.
0—I'm not going to play here again and you can't make me
How was the layout? Did it flow well? Marked well?
1pt—Great Job, where holes ended others started, there was a method to figuring it out.
.50—with a little work you could figure it out, there is some disruption of end/start points
0—This was chaos, no way to tell which is which.
What about the technical aspects of the course? Left Handed/Right Handed mix. Requiring above average skill to play.
Aesthetics: How picturesque was the course? Was it appealing to the eye?
Facilities: Adequate and nearby parking, bathrooms, access to water, meeting area.
Maintenance: Was the course well kept from debris, garbage, and mowed? Plus bridges, walkways, etc in good order.
General Feeling: Very subjective rating based how you felt about the course overall.
Balance: Mix of short/long holes, wooded/open holes
Amenities: How would you rate the tees, benches, and any other niceties of the course.
Elevation:
1pt. – It was perfect for me.
.75 – It was pretty good, neither too flat nor too hilly
.50 – I could tolerate it, either too flat or too hilly
.25 – Elevation was definitely an issue on this course
.0 – It was so bad it distracts from the enjoyment of playing disc golf.
10 catagories, all somewhat subjective, a few totally subjective, add up to a total score. I tried to add a few descriptions so it would make more sense of what we were talking about, if more explaination is needed feel free to ask.
Clark-Johnson Disc Golf Course Scale
Rate everything with a 1, .75, .50, .25, or 0
Would I play it again?
1pt – I would definitely play it again.
.75—I would try and play it again if I were in the area.
.50—I could take it or leave it.
.25—I'm only playing here again if I have to.
0—I'm not going to play here again and you can't make me
How was the layout? Did it flow well? Marked well?
1pt—Great Job, where holes ended others started, there was a method to figuring it out.
.50—with a little work you could figure it out, there is some disruption of end/start points
0—This was chaos, no way to tell which is which.
What about the technical aspects of the course? Left Handed/Right Handed mix. Requiring above average skill to play.
Aesthetics: How picturesque was the course? Was it appealing to the eye?
Facilities: Adequate and nearby parking, bathrooms, access to water, meeting area.
Maintenance: Was the course well kept from debris, garbage, and mowed? Plus bridges, walkways, etc in good order.
General Feeling: Very subjective rating based how you felt about the course overall.
Balance: Mix of short/long holes, wooded/open holes
Amenities: How would you rate the tees, benches, and any other niceties of the course.
Elevation:
1pt. – It was perfect for me.
.75 – It was pretty good, neither too flat nor too hilly
.50 – I could tolerate it, either too flat or too hilly
.25 – Elevation was definitely an issue on this course
.0 – It was so bad it distracts from the enjoyment of playing disc golf.
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,776
Ok, how about this?
0.0 - Abysmal
0.5 - Bad
1.0 - Poor
1.5 - Passable
2.0 - Reasonable
2.5 - Decent/Typical
3.0 - Good
3.5 - Very Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Phenomenal
5.0 - Best of the Best
0.0 - Abysmal
0.5 - Bad
1.0 - Poor
1.5 - Passable
2.0 - Reasonable
2.5 - Decent/Typical
3.0 - Good
3.5 - Very Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Phenomenal
5.0 - Best of the Best
I like it. I wonder if like someone else said, you'll have to be answering the question, "What is average?" However, taking the word average out seems like a good idea to me.
It only took 13 pages of discussion to get to this point. Not bad
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,776
Semantic hair splitting, but I like 2.5- Decent/Ordinary better. Typical seems more subjective than other words.
e.g.- For a Flip City homie if they think that's "typical" then no other course will ever get above a 1.0! Well, perhaps Idlewild might get a 1.5 if they were feeling exceptionally gracious and magnanimous.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,072
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,072
Head over here: http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/profile.php?do=editoptionsIt only took 13 pages of discussion to get to this point. Not bad
and set your "Number of Posts to Show Per Page" to 40. You'll get a much more efficient 4 pages.
ERic
Pitch
Newbie
You know when i'd heard about this course rating thing I was kinda concerned on how and WHO was rating the courses.
The ONLY way I could see fair course evaluations if if a few experienced seasoned golfers were to travel the globe and do this.(Yeah Right)
I didn't take the time to read everybodies posts but am sure this has got to be the most popular and discussed on the site.Duh?
I've seen several in my 30 plus years of golf.Played every type of T Pad,Every possible hole design.Terrain etc.
I knew that peoples opinions would be based on several things.(But obviously their course is gonna be the best LOL,Gotta get em there somehow right)
I've played courses designed by the so called best,Amatures and so on.
Here's how I evaluate a course,Ready?
Convienence from the parking lot.My favorite is the front 9 and back 9 being right there.I ALWAYS shoot for this if possible.Better be a practice basket sittin there too.
Restrooms and Pavillions are the only reason I don't give a 5 in most cases where I post a 4.I won't even post a 5 on any of my courses(Alma did just install new restrooms and has a nice Pavillion now)
Still won't get it from me because of Maintanance and it's MY course.
Shot Variations.Does it take every shot you have.Will you use every disc(Will you FINALLY have to learn how to throw a sidearm roller or nasty 360)I like courses that challenge you and make golfers out of Ams.
T Pads,Are they level,The right texture,Concrete is the best IMO and level with the ground(No step up or Drop off)
Signs,Can you find the pin,Next Tee.
Safety,Flow etc
Now i've played one that was setup by the numero uno and found several holes playing blindly over others teeing off,Walking way out of the way to maybe find the next T Box.Ridiculous lenghts(Long doesn't nessessarily mean good,Try Almas 126ft Devils Fork,That's Golf.
But since it was designed by this guy it's an automatic Home Run.Yeah right.
I just designed a course that plays 5,400 short and 8,000 long.(Arkadelphia Ar)Thing is your not walking any farther playing either layout and you can easily see or find the next T Box.
Now i've been guilty of laying out what SEEMED to be an inexperienced hole or two.(Alma)
The thing is every time i'd get where I wanted the MAYOR ate up some of my course.I was always chasing him around and fixing the course.But it's still a cool course and easy to follow.
Maybe after a few thousand evaluations and a few years of balancing out the averages we'll have a pretty fair evaluation of most courses.
Ben geren in Ft Smith is a nice flowing,Easy to follow,Read and PLAYABLE course.Concrete Pads,Alternate pin placements(Still walk the same distances A and B)Front and Back nine from the parking lot but still maybe a 4 because of Restrooms and Parking(Working on this)
Play Russellville Arkansas,My best work and favorite course.
Still a 4,No restrooms,No Alternates(Yet)
Plays every shot,Open,Wooded,5,800ft,Concrete Pads,Great Signs,Tons of natural OB,Some elevation.
I hope this site really enables people to get a real perspective on what courses are and what they can be in the future.
I like most am looking for that piece of land to leave a 5 rating on.(Could be Hot Springs if they'd just let me in there,Working on that too)
I have only rated half a dozen so far,Played many more and plan on rating a few each day.(Honestly)
Have fun folks.
Pitch.
The ONLY way I could see fair course evaluations if if a few experienced seasoned golfers were to travel the globe and do this.(Yeah Right)
I didn't take the time to read everybodies posts but am sure this has got to be the most popular and discussed on the site.Duh?
I've seen several in my 30 plus years of golf.Played every type of T Pad,Every possible hole design.Terrain etc.
I knew that peoples opinions would be based on several things.(But obviously their course is gonna be the best LOL,Gotta get em there somehow right)
I've played courses designed by the so called best,Amatures and so on.
Here's how I evaluate a course,Ready?
Convienence from the parking lot.My favorite is the front 9 and back 9 being right there.I ALWAYS shoot for this if possible.Better be a practice basket sittin there too.
Restrooms and Pavillions are the only reason I don't give a 5 in most cases where I post a 4.I won't even post a 5 on any of my courses(Alma did just install new restrooms and has a nice Pavillion now)
Still won't get it from me because of Maintanance and it's MY course.
Shot Variations.Does it take every shot you have.Will you use every disc(Will you FINALLY have to learn how to throw a sidearm roller or nasty 360)I like courses that challenge you and make golfers out of Ams.
T Pads,Are they level,The right texture,Concrete is the best IMO and level with the ground(No step up or Drop off)
Signs,Can you find the pin,Next Tee.
Safety,Flow etc
Now i've played one that was setup by the numero uno and found several holes playing blindly over others teeing off,Walking way out of the way to maybe find the next T Box.Ridiculous lenghts(Long doesn't nessessarily mean good,Try Almas 126ft Devils Fork,That's Golf.
But since it was designed by this guy it's an automatic Home Run.Yeah right.
I just designed a course that plays 5,400 short and 8,000 long.(Arkadelphia Ar)Thing is your not walking any farther playing either layout and you can easily see or find the next T Box.
Now i've been guilty of laying out what SEEMED to be an inexperienced hole or two.(Alma)
The thing is every time i'd get where I wanted the MAYOR ate up some of my course.I was always chasing him around and fixing the course.But it's still a cool course and easy to follow.
Maybe after a few thousand evaluations and a few years of balancing out the averages we'll have a pretty fair evaluation of most courses.
Ben geren in Ft Smith is a nice flowing,Easy to follow,Read and PLAYABLE course.Concrete Pads,Alternate pin placements(Still walk the same distances A and B)Front and Back nine from the parking lot but still maybe a 4 because of Restrooms and Parking(Working on this)
Play Russellville Arkansas,My best work and favorite course.
Still a 4,No restrooms,No Alternates(Yet)
Plays every shot,Open,Wooded,5,800ft,Concrete Pads,Great Signs,Tons of natural OB,Some elevation.
I hope this site really enables people to get a real perspective on what courses are and what they can be in the future.
I like most am looking for that piece of land to leave a 5 rating on.(Could be Hot Springs if they'd just let me in there,Working on that too)
I have only rated half a dozen so far,Played many more and plan on rating a few each day.(Honestly)
Have fun folks.
Pitch.
borndasaur
Birdie Member
I just started playing 6 months ago and started rating some of the local courses last month. Something that is a huge help is meeting and talking to the course designers. Impractical unless you are a local or are in a position to meet these guys. When I was getting ready to rate the Squirrel Lake course, I found out that some of the things I saw a "cons" were done to stay within wildlife habitat restrictions and these became "pros" IMO. The designer's intentions are huge contributors to final designs and should be part of course reviews whenever possible. Remember, all courses cannot be all things to all players.
Pitch
Newbie
Very good point.
"all courses cannot be all things to all players"
that is the biggest key to this whole deal - a good course for pros might not be a good course for newer players, and vice versa - multiple tees help, but sometimes there are restrictions, especially on courses in public parks with restricted space, etc.
also, as has been mentioned by others before, a lot of people like mixture and balance, including myself, but if a course has half wooded holes and half open holes, then a person who only likes one type of course will be disappointed in at least half of this course - an all wooded course may not have a lot of mixture, but at least you know what your getting yourself into when you go to play a course like this and if you like wooded courses, then you will enjoy playing a course like this ahead of time (personally I try to mention what a person can expect in a course in my review, so they won't waste a trip to a course they will not like)
so that becomes the key question, how do you accurately rate a course you personally may not like, even if it is a really awesome course and many other types of players will love this particular course? I personally do not like pitch and putt courses, but if it is a good course for ams and other newer players, then I will give it the credit that it is due, because somebody will come along and this course will be perfect for them
that is the biggest key to this whole deal - a good course for pros might not be a good course for newer players, and vice versa - multiple tees help, but sometimes there are restrictions, especially on courses in public parks with restricted space, etc.
also, as has been mentioned by others before, a lot of people like mixture and balance, including myself, but if a course has half wooded holes and half open holes, then a person who only likes one type of course will be disappointed in at least half of this course - an all wooded course may not have a lot of mixture, but at least you know what your getting yourself into when you go to play a course like this and if you like wooded courses, then you will enjoy playing a course like this ahead of time (personally I try to mention what a person can expect in a course in my review, so they won't waste a trip to a course they will not like)
so that becomes the key question, how do you accurately rate a course you personally may not like, even if it is a really awesome course and many other types of players will love this particular course? I personally do not like pitch and putt courses, but if it is a good course for ams and other newer players, then I will give it the credit that it is due, because somebody will come along and this course will be perfect for them
Pitch
Newbie
What I look for in a course is diversity.The mixture of everything(If possible)
See the way I look at them is like this(And this is just MY opinion)
I know that the majority of golfers are always gonna be rec .Not everyone that plays is going to want or be able to make it as a pro.We are outnumbered by Rec players.
But when I rate a course I am thinking of the more serious golfers.The ones who are trying to make the ranks.
Now when I keep these folks in mind I know that the choices they have when trying to make the steps up to the pros will be limited.They will play whatevers in front of them and dominate it all.
The ones who say I only like wooded courses or I only like Open courses are in for a rude awakening.(If trying to go Pro etc)
So when I rate a course I look at all the options the course has to offer pertaining to the people who are trying or are capable of becoming better golfers in the future.
When I lay one out or rate one ,I imagine the Rec and folks like Climo or Feldberg.
Like OK the rec is gonna have to hoan his or her skills to make par on the short layout(And even Rec players wanna be better)But then could someone with an arm and some skills have a time with this.
Sure people will rate them because they like THIS type of course or THAT kind of course.It's gonna happen.
And really to give one a great rating because it's one or the other isn't really fair in my opinion.
To me they rate better when they are both.And of course with all the frills that come along with them.
(T Pads,Alternates,Parking,Restrooms,Benches,Trashcans etc etc etc.)
See that's where I was wondering how this was going to be a fair system.
For example,La Mirada Calif.
Some people think because of it's History,Location,The Weather (so on and so forth) It's an automatic highly rated course.Yes it's a historical course, But in reality it's a mess.
Lousy T Pads,Signs,And even the layout in some places could be better.I gave it a 3(I think maybe even a 2 because of the resentments,It's been let go and it p's me off)
In time,The ratings should average out.But for now I see some that are rated way too high.(Just the ones I know of mind you.)
I believe the ratings system should be based on a Pros level of playing.
Yes people need to be informed,Alot of my phone calls are from folks just passin thru.They need to be directed towards the course that they read about on here.Not something that's been blown out of proportion because some amature cans every hole and it's their personal favorite.
Pictures should be mandatory as well.This way they can see first hand the terrain.
Like I said,Just my opinion.
See the way I look at them is like this(And this is just MY opinion)
I know that the majority of golfers are always gonna be rec .Not everyone that plays is going to want or be able to make it as a pro.We are outnumbered by Rec players.
But when I rate a course I am thinking of the more serious golfers.The ones who are trying to make the ranks.
Now when I keep these folks in mind I know that the choices they have when trying to make the steps up to the pros will be limited.They will play whatevers in front of them and dominate it all.
The ones who say I only like wooded courses or I only like Open courses are in for a rude awakening.(If trying to go Pro etc)
So when I rate a course I look at all the options the course has to offer pertaining to the people who are trying or are capable of becoming better golfers in the future.
When I lay one out or rate one ,I imagine the Rec and folks like Climo or Feldberg.
Like OK the rec is gonna have to hoan his or her skills to make par on the short layout(And even Rec players wanna be better)But then could someone with an arm and some skills have a time with this.
Sure people will rate them because they like THIS type of course or THAT kind of course.It's gonna happen.
And really to give one a great rating because it's one or the other isn't really fair in my opinion.
To me they rate better when they are both.And of course with all the frills that come along with them.
(T Pads,Alternates,Parking,Restrooms,Benches,Trashcans etc etc etc.)
See that's where I was wondering how this was going to be a fair system.
For example,La Mirada Calif.
Some people think because of it's History,Location,The Weather (so on and so forth) It's an automatic highly rated course.Yes it's a historical course, But in reality it's a mess.
Lousy T Pads,Signs,And even the layout in some places could be better.I gave it a 3(I think maybe even a 2 because of the resentments,It's been let go and it p's me off)
In time,The ratings should average out.But for now I see some that are rated way too high.(Just the ones I know of mind you.)
I believe the ratings system should be based on a Pros level of playing.
Yes people need to be informed,Alot of my phone calls are from folks just passin thru.They need to be directed towards the course that they read about on here.Not something that's been blown out of proportion because some amature cans every hole and it's their personal favorite.
Pictures should be mandatory as well.This way they can see first hand the terrain.
Like I said,Just my opinion.
for me personally, I like to think about what this site is used for most and that is probably for players who will be traveling to a new area to play a new course for the first time
so with that idea, these people need to know what the best courses are in that area and the review should basically tell them what they can expect at each course
so with that idea, these people need to know what the best courses are in that area and the review should basically tell them what they can expect at each course
borndasaur
Birdie Member
Reviews are opinions. There are certain criteria that are common to all courses (amenities, signage, tee pads, basket types, etc.) and these are the bases for objective comparisons. Subjective comparisons are the debatable points that people agree or disagree on(too long/short, too easy/hard, etc.) Effectively combining the two are what make reviews useful to players choosing courses to play. This is why this site works. In addition to the 0 through 5 rating, each reviewer can rate objective criteria as well as give subjective opinions and detail how they arrive at their rating. The reader then can make a personal judgement as to whether a particular review or author is helpful to them.
well said
Similar threads
